Group items tagged

"Fewer Americans are likely to own a gun now than 40 years ago, but those who do are more likely to own handguns over rifles or shotguns. As the proportion of those with handguns has increased, so has the number of children under the age of 5 who are dying from firearm injuries, according to a new study."

"A month ago, a former student roamed the halls of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High, opening fire on terrified students and teachers at the Florida school."

not much has changed, at least at a federal level

It seems like there is an agreement that there needs to be a change in how firearms and school shootings are dealt with but there is disagreement as to how legislation will do that. There has been no federal reform but while there has been legislation passed in Florida, many teachers and school districts are rejecting it due to its suggestion of arming teachers. There seems to be a divide on whether guns are the problem or the people are the problem.

How do you all feel about items/weapons like these being readily available and advertised?

As long as he is following all the rules that come along with manufacturing and selling weapons I feel like he should be able to do it. Yes a flamethrower is a little on the extreme side but as long he is staying within the realm of the law I feel like it should be allowed.

Flamethrowers are like guns so if the person buying the flamethrower is able to buy a gun then they should be able to purchase this as well.

"You guys are the generation that is going to make some sort of change if change is going to happen," McGuire said. "We want to support you in that, but we also want to make sure you're safe."

This woman said she would condone guns in a Wyoming school to protect students from bears. Is this the woman we want to make decisions for our schools?

Betsy DeVos does not belong running public schools. She has never taught in one and she has never went to one. The most she has done is mentor in one. She sends her children to private schools. She is the wrong person for the job. Who would condone school children to have guns to "Protect them from Bears."

"In May, Slager pleaded guilty to deprivation of rights under color of law after a murder trial ended in a mistrial. He admitted he didn't shoot Scott in self defense and said he used excessive force. Federal prosecutors are seeking a life sentence. Prosecutors believe Slager committed second-degree murder and should also be punished for obstructing justice."

I think that the officer should get life in prison for killing this man. The man ran but there's other options than firing your gun at him, there was no threat to the officer, he was unarmed, and the officer said he used force that was unnecessary.

The cop shouldn't of shot the man in the back, there was no threat towards the officer. If the man pulled a knife or a gun out then I'll see why the police officer shot him, but because the man had no weapons on him and was just running way he shouldn't of gotten shot.

Thoughts?

I feel like you should be able to charge juveniles as adults. I think it would be absurd to just let kids away with committing crimes, especially the one this kid did. If an adult did something like this no one would even think twice about arresting them, why is it different in this case? I think that he needs to be put behind bars and he needs some sort of counseling because obviously something is not right with him. It might also help to know what kind of background the kid has, to see why he did it. There has to be a reason.

You both make a good point, but when a kid gets charged with a felony, he obviously has done wrong. Sometimes you do bad things, but its not as bad compared to other things. Though when you get older, you can continue to do bad things, and the bad things can turn into crimes, etc. Sometimes charging teens as adults is the way to go, even if it doesn't seem fare. Maybe not fore life, but two years, or even one, wont do any harm.

I think if someone did crime, they should be punished no matter their age. so make them realize how bad it is.

This protest is so dangerous for so many reasons, protesting should be peaceful and there shouldn't need to be guns there especially when people feel threatened. Everybody has a right to their opinion, but they should voice it in a respectful and peaceful manner otherwise it makes them look uneducated and violent.

There has to be something wrong with this kid. If you read the story and hear what he said to the court and to the families of the victims he shot, you'll understand. It is scary that someone could be so awful.

People like this don't do well in Prisons. He'll most likely have a very rough life where he's going, especially after what he has said. He'll "get what is coming for him" and I honestly feel no pity, even though I do believe he should be charged as an adult. This is disgusting. I would not have been able to rest easy if I were in that court knowing the guy is in jail after what he had done, let alone what he had said, he deserves way worse than what he got. He obviously took pleasure in killing those innocent students. Good luck in prison, mate, because you are certainly going to need it if you don't want to end up as cold as those concrete walls you'll be surrounded by. Either that or he'll end up as Big Jerry's finger puppet.

The death sentence would be an easy way out for him. Spending your entire life rotting away in jail having your actions hung over your head is a much better punishment in my opinion. Not to mention, killing someone else will not bring your loved ones back or make you feel better, at least it shouldn't anyway. I read a story about a woman's 6 year old daughter who had been kidnapped and murdered,but she did not wish to have the man killed, because she said, "How do I honor Susie and Susie's life and the goodness and sweetness and beauty of who she was? To kill somebody in her name would be an insult to her memory." I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I just think life sentence without parole is a better option.

Erica Simmons rings the campus bell at Agnes Scott College in Decatur, Georgia, during a nationwide commemoration December 21, marking a week since the Newtown, Connecticut, mass shooting. Church bells rang out across the country at 9:30 ET Friday to remember those who died in the gun rampage.

Someone posted this, but it wasn't possible to comment

First point: I fail to see how denying a single cell the chance to go through mitosis is abortion. It's no more aware than bacteria. Also, the author is referencing the morning-after pill. For some reason there's a lot of confusion about how the morning after pill actually works. It prevents the egg from joining the sperm, or depending on where the woman is in her cycle, prevents the ovaries from releasing eggs. Contrary to what pro-life proponents apparently believe, conception does not happen immediately after having sex. If using the morning-after pill is abortion, we may as well call abstinence abortion. Secondly, "the mandate requires private citizens who are also employers to purchase private goods (health insurance services) with private money from non-government companies." This is clearly written by a sensationalist. What it really means is that a company has to use its own money to provide healthcare. (And everyone seems to be forgetting that employees don't just receive healthcare plans for free). There is a difference between being a private citizen and being an employer. Owning a public company and employing people is about as far from private as you can get. "Requiring private citizens to pay for abortifacients is more akin to requiring the Amish to use their own money to purchase weapons from a private gun dealer or be forced into bankruptcy. Or kind of like forcing anti-pornography legal scholar Catharine MacKinnon to buy pornography for her law students." This is simply ludicrous and shows that the author clearly doesn't understand what a business is. It's a corporation, it employees people, it isn't a private citizen. I will admit that if Hobby Lobby employed only people who were in complete agreement with the beliefs of the owners I would support them in their case. However, the reality is that many of Hobby Lobby's employees don't share the exact same beliefs as the owner. And it would in fact be illegal for Hobby Lobby to choose their employ

ees because of their beliefs. And the last time I checked, in America we don't make people follow certain religions or beliefs. In fact, the law isn't supposed to be based in religion. I know it sounds shocking, but it actually isn't okay to force a religion on people, or to make everyone live in accordance with one belief system, which is exactly what Hobby Lobby, and everyone who argues against this provision in the new health care law, is trying to do. Lastly, the author says repeatedly that this law essentially discriminates against Christians, which is a complete lie. Christians is a broad term. There are Christians who believe in all kinds of birth control and then there are those who think all birth control should be outlawed. There are even Christians who get abortions. So, and this is a message to anyone who writes articles of this kind, stop saying just saying Christians. Tell the truth and call yourself a Fundamentalist. Saying Christians make it seem like the majority of people who believe in Jesus Christ agree with you, and they don't. You're a minority, and you need to accept that. And maybe read a little about how our government works. It's a majority rules system.