There is no easy way to put a bullet through someone’s heart. I don’t care what anybody says about the proper method: in person, over the phone, through email, via smoke signals; the end result is always the same. We seem to think that by cleverly executing a number of actions in a precise order, we can end up with a “That’s OK; I completely understand. You are most certainly not an asshole,” kind of response. It’s not going to happen. Breaking up is an unfortunate and necessary torture that we endure as creatures of desire.

In my latest execution, I opted for the phone—yes, the phone. Before being sentenced to death by the American Dating Association, I shall present my defense. I don’t handle public outburst very well. If I were confronted with a situation in which I was attempting to maintain a composed façade while the poor girl openly weeps over a half eaten sandwich at Denny’s, I’d be most likely to crack under pressure, toss my wallet onto the table, and get the hell out of Dodge. Would it be that much better if I put it off until we’re in the car after dinner? Sure, it’s no matter that I just spent the last forty-five minutes smiling and lying through our last supper. I would have some leverage, though; I did pay the entire bill, plus tip!

Maybe I’m just desensitized to the various methods of breaking up. My famed two and a half year run was ended via a letter. A letter—typed! It wasn’t as bad as it sounds; she did hand it to me. In retrospect, it was actually a rather thoughtful gesture. It afforded me the ability and freedom to fall apart on my own time, in my own way, in the privacy of my own—well, our own—home. Falling apart involved me calmly and collectively leaving the room, calling my sister, and telling her, without tears, that we broke up. I never was much of a crier.

I guess that’s why I opted for the phone this time around. You have the freedom to go to pieces in your own way, without having to worry about an entire restaurant gawking, without having to drive home nearly blinded by the tears; you’re in a place where you always feel comfortable. Sure, it’s a copout and one is considered a coward for using the phone, but look at what you’re dealing with. You’re not going to get a positive response no matter which way you cut it. You may as well give the other person the courtesy to bury their face in a pillow and cry their eyes out. There’s also a good chance that there’s some ice cream in the freezer, too.

Breaking up with somebody is your last chance to prove that you really are just a cold, selfish prick. It’s very liberating to be able to openly acknowledge all those little things that you couldn’t stand and kept quiet for so long. The airing of grievances is so uplifting that you almost have a newfound respect for this person. You realize that maybe, just maybe, they’re not so bad after all. This notion is quickly dismissed the moment you speak with your ex for the first time post-breakup, and you are instantly reminded why you pulled the trigger in the first place.

Every relationship and termination thereof leaves a lasting impression whether we like it or not. There’s always a song or a movie or a simple phrase that takes us back to happier times: the brief engagements that felt right at the time, and the long lasting relationships that we never thought would end. The ones that mean everything until one day they are suddenly gone. They leave behind mental complexes, shattered trust and shattered hearts, and depressing, forlorn journal entries. These are the relationships that we spend our whole lives trying to get back. We search all corners of the earth and do our damnedest to find them, one breakup at a time.

We live in a reactionary society. A major event occurs and we react to it in illogical and hasty manner. We implement devices and measures in hopes to curb such activities in the future, and as time progresses, we look and see that nothing has happened, and believe that the measures put in place actually prevented such activities to occur. This is a completely illogical deduction, and one that further allows these irrational measures to be put into place. What happens when subways are bombed? We start searching bags, as if it would be impossible to detonate a bomb in a line of people waiting for their bags to be checked. What then, start searching outside the subway? Get rid of the right to carry bags all together?

We are so simple, and our greatest flaw is ultimately our lack of imagination. To think that putting metal detectors in school after Columbine “prevented” school shootings is a failure to realize that these murderers walked into their school armed and prepared to commit the atrocities which they did. A metal detector would have provided no deterrence to their ultimate goal.

We have to look at the big time line of the world. How often have subway bombings occurred? School shootings? Planes used as missles aimed at large buildings? These are sporadic, isolated instances. If it were happening on a daily basis, then there might be cause for concern. We need to focus less on patchwork legislation and more on fixing the underlying problems.

Believing that increased ability for law enforcement to tap our phone lines and collect our data would also assume that law enforcement has the ability to predict the future and find the needle in the haystack. This data would provide nothing more than an after-the-fact “we should have seen this coming…the evidence was staring us right in the face” reaction. It’s very easy to put the puzzle together once you’ve seen the end result, once you know what you’re looking for.

Had all of these post-9/11 laws been in place, could 9/11 have been prevented? Look at what we had. Some of the hijackers had been flagged by the FBI. On August 6, 2001, the CIA presented a report aptly titled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.” In the end, when there’s a will, there’s a way, and these laws in place do nothing more than destroy the very rights in which this country was founded on.

1. There is no sense of community. The internet has brought people from around the world together in a way they’ve never been before, yet everybody seems more disconnected from any form of community now more than ever. Those communities that do exist are old fashioned and out of sense (religious groups) and are contributors towards the reasons “Why there should be a revolution…”
2. We’ve been brought up under the impression that the anti-establishment is bad…and we believe it.
3. Our downfall is brought on one dial click at a time, in a way that we can adjust ourselves accordingly and accept it before we slip one click further (see “gas prices”).
4. The push for technology to become a necessity in everyone’s lives causes people to focus on consuming, much to the joy of major corporations.
5. The surplus of patriotism flooding the country. However, this patriotism has changed from supporting ones country to supporting said country’s leadership, who of course seems innocent and harmless, but in reality is truely corrupt and pushing said country into the pit. Events that take place now which would have once caused an uproar have now become accepted past times, thanks to reason number three.
6. Greed, both on the large scale with corporations and the small scale with individuals, thanks to reasons one and four.
7. Apathy and laziness.
8. Even as I type this, I’m just as guilty as the guy next to me, yet I’m sure I won’t do anything about it aside from type this out and post it in my blog. A continuing, viscious cycle.

(As a side note, I just watched a documentary, “punk: attitude,” on IFC, and I felt inspired)

It feels very satisfying to have a personal fear or conspiracy vindicated in front of your own eyes, but on the other hand, it’s twice as frightening. Today I witnessed something that goes without any explanation or reason, something that a friend of mine had talked about not even two years ago, which I thought was somewhat crazy at the time and something I didn’t think I’d ever see. Here goes…

I work at a national retailer which will remain nameless for obvious reasons. A customer of mine was making a sizeable purchase for which he was paying with his check card. He noted that he may have a per day point of sale limit, which I am used to regularly handling (my own credit union has a $500 per day limit). The only way to prove this was to go through the sale and hopefully be approved. The purchase was split into two separate transactions for other reason, and the first transaction went through no problem. It seemed like smooth sailing…

Second transaction comes up declined. OK, no big deal, there’s always an option of signing up for a store card. No such luck. Being Sunday, we felt there were no other options because he did not have his checkbook with him. I noted that a lot of banks, especially ones with a large operation such as his, offer 24/7 phone service. Luckily, his did. With one quick phone call to the bank to request a limit increase, we should be alright and he will be able to go home happy with his new purchase, right?

Wrong again. Due to my ineffective manner of delivering the point, let me reiterate. He called the bank to request a limit increase to allow him to spend his money that he had in his account, and they denied his request. Let me run that by you again…they would not let him spend money which he had in his account. Access denied.

If you’re not shocked, appalled, concerned, troubled, worried, fearful, curious, and/or affected in any way by this, stop reading, because the point is lost in you. Look at the big picture…as we slip closer and closer into a cashless society, the fact that this is even possible at this point in the game is frightening. Sit and think of some extreme cases of abuse of such ability…something that seems totally far fetched and unrealistic, something that you may have read in an George Orwell book. Now read back my story and think about how far fetched it may have seemed fifty–hell, even ten years ago.

Remember, we are being lead by people who shit hundred dollar bills. Whether Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, whatever, we’re being lead by people who no longer appreciate the value of a dollar, who don’t understand what money means to the average person. The fact that it’s even legal for banks to do this, to deny one the right to spend money they’ve rightfully earned, is completely twisted.

The icing on the cake is that he was an employee of our federal government. The kick in the balls is that, after splitting the payments across different cards with the second transaction (and thus after being denied by his bank), he got a phone call on his cell phone from his bank’s fraud protection service to make sure it was him using his card…ouch.

I openly welcome any logical explaination of such ability banks possess. I’d rather not come off as a clueless jerk venting about a baseless argument.