New York Daily News Washington state officials to eye rules to ban pot at bars Fox News SEATTLE – Washington state officials said Wednesday it's not OK for bars to allow marijuana use, and they plan to take steps to address that.
Brianna Moore's insight:
Last fall Pot was legalized, all though it is forbidened to be displayed or used in public. Although, now it is starting to be used in bars. This could cause a huge increase in fines and violations for that bar. Many bars have tried to get around the rule of not smoking pot by creating a "smoke room" for people in the back of bars. Michael Schaef's- owner of a marijuana bar, said "What the board has to understand is that people have always been mixing alcohol and cannabis," Schaef said. "If they don't allow this, what we are doing is forcing people to break the law by sneaking to some dark area to do it." I agree with this statement, but either way, you will always have people sneaking away to do it."
The student who planned a massacre at the University of Central Florida before he shot himself to death was going through a checklist for the day, that included “pull fire alarm,” then “give them hell,” police said.
roomate calls 911 and by doing that, he saved a huge gun shooting. I can't beleive how some peoples minds work. I dont understand it at all. "pull the fire alarm, and than give them hell." That is just scary.
I feel like the officer did violate his 4th amendment right. It wasn't his place to just go and read the messages through the phone without a warrent or anything. But this is a tricky situation because it did help him get evidence for the murder case.
Protect both gay, church rights. Thank you for supporting gay marriage. It means a great deal to me, a gay man. Even more importantly, it means a great deal to my family, children and the close friends supporting me and all ...
I thought that this was really humble of the man. He is gay, but also understand that some churches can not go against their beliefs of not marrying him. Religious freedom is garenteed by the first amendment. I like how he also proves a point on why gays should be able to marry as well though.
The Dow set a new high on Tuesday, but the larger economy is a different story. What if today's sluggish economic growth turns out to be the new normal? That's the unsettling question asked by some of our most creative economic thinkers.
And the people asking it are not necessarily partisan opponents of the Obama administration. They argue that economic growth rates were disappointing even before the financial collapse and recession of 2007-09.
Take Tyler Cowen, author of the e-book (belatedly published in print) "The Great Stagnation." Economic growth is the product of increases in the labor supply and productivity, he argues uncontroversially.
But the U.S. labor force -- even assuming we get back to full employment -- is not increasing as rapidly as it did when baby boomers and Gen Xers were reaching their working years.
As for productivity, Cowen argues that we simply haven't had the kind of innovations in technology or means of production that we saw in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Advances in information technology, he writes, have produced nothing like the productivity gains produced by the development of electricity, the synthesis of ammonia, the invention of the internal combustion engine and the development of new metal production technologies -- gains documented in Vaclav Smil's book "Creating the Twentieth Century: Technical Innovations of 1867-1914 and Their Lasting Impact."
In response to Cowen, Megan McArdle of The Daily Beast writes, "We are not prepared for low growth: culturally, economically or psychologically."
In a fast-growth economy, it makes financial sense for young people to borrow and for government to transfer money from current earners to the elderly.
That's why we had government policies subsidizing people borrowing to buy homes and pay for college.
Unfortunately, those policies produced windfall gains for unscrupulous mortgage originators and university administrators. And they produced the housing bubble that burst in 2007 and the higher education bubble that is in the process of bursting now.
Politicians have been searching for policies to restore the status quo ante bubble.
Two more days left until the spending cuts kick in! I think it is crazy that Government officials and Military leaders attempted to warn congress about the consequences that they would face if they did not agree on an alternative. Our economy is already in a bad spot, recovering form recession.
The Department of Homeland Security has started releasing hundreds of illegal immigrants held in local jails in anticipation of automatic budget cuts, in a move one Arizona sheriff called politically motivated -- and dangerous. ...
I am indifferent about this situation that they are placed with. Clearly, they don't have enough money to keep all of the illegal immigrant criminals in jail in Arizona. But than you think about it, and they are putting more American lives in danger, just to help there budget cuts. Lives are more important than budget cuts in my opinion. I don't know how they would do this, but I feel like the savings they are trying to accomplish could be acheived in a much more rational and safe way. One statement really stood out to me. "Clearly, serious criminals are being released to the streets of our local communities by this mass budget pardon. These are illegals that even President Obama wants to deport. This is insane that public safety is sacrificed when it should be the budget priority that's safeguarded," he said.
Washington Times US to deploy anti-missile system to Guam Washington Post Hagel, in a speech at the National Defense University in Washington, specifically cited “the threats that the North Koreans have leveled directly at the United States...
Brianna Moore's insight:
I'm very glad that we are taking this threat seriously.
ABC News Republicans Block Obama Nominee to Appeals Court ABC News Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked the confirmation of federal appeals court nominee Caitlin Halligan for the second time, denying President Barack Obama a key judicial...
Columbine survivor Evan Todd released an open letter to President Barack Obama on Wednesday in which he offers a point-by-point analysis of proposed firearms control initiatives, dismissing them as ineffective and dangerous to Americans’ rights.
He recently outlined why he fervently disagrees with the gun control policies that have been proposed in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. TheBlazeinterviewed Todd earlier this week and subsequently detailed how his experience being shot back in 1999 has shaped his views on the issue.
The letter, which speaks directly to the president, covers a number of key facets in the gun control debate. On universal background checks, Todd expresses his fears that “universal registration can easily be used for universal confiscation.” Additionally, he says his belief that assault weapons bans are ineffective and argues that the first law did little to stop violence when it was in effect from 1994 until 2004; he cites Columbine as a prime example.
“It was during this time that I personally witnessed two fellow students murder twelve of my classmates and one teacher,” he writes. “The assault weapons ban did not deter these two murderers, nor did the other thirty-something laws that they broke.”
“Why would you prefer criminals to have the ability to out-gun law-abiding citizens?,” he asks the president in the text. “Whose side are you on?”
Read Todd’s open letter to Obama, below.
As a student who was shot and wounded during the Columbine massacre, I have a few thoughts on the current gun debate. In regards to your gun control initiatives:
Universal Background Checks
First, a universal background check will have many devastating effects. It will arguably have the opposite impact of what you propose. If adopted, criminals will know that they can not pass a background check legally, so they will resort to other avenues. With the conditions being set by this initiative, it will create a large black market for weapons and will support more criminal activity and funnel additional money into the hands of thugs, criminals, and people who will do harm to American citizens.
Second, universal background checks will create a huge bureaucracy that will cost an enormous amount of tax payers dollars and will straddle us with more debt. We cannot afford it now, let alone create another function of government that will have a huge monthly bill attached to it.
Third, is a universal background check system possible without universal gun registration? If so, please define it for us. Universal registration can easily be used for universal confiscation. I am not at all implying that you, sir, would try such a measure, but we do need to think about our actions through the lens of time.
It is not impossible to think that a tyrant, to the likes of Mao, Castro, Che, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and others, could possibly rise to power in America. It could be five, ten, twenty, or one hundred years from now — but future generations have the natural right to protect themselves from tyrannical government just as much as we currently do. It is safe to assume that this liberty that our forefathers secured has been a thorn in the side of would-be tyrants ever since the Second Amendment was adopted.
Ban on Military-Style Assault Weapons
The evidence is very clear pertaining to the inadequacies of the assault weapons ban. It had little to no effect when it was in place from 1994 until 2004. It was during this time that I personally witnessed two fellow students murder twelve of my classmates and one teacher. The assault weapons ban did not deter these two murderers, nor did the other thirty-something laws that they broke.
Gun ownership is at an all time high. And although tragedies like Columbine and Newtown are exploited by ideologues and special-interest lobbying groups, crime is at an all time low. The people have spoken. Gun store shelves have been emptied. Gun shows are breaking attendance records. Gun manufacturers are sold out and back ordered. Shortages on ammo and firearms are countrywide. The American people have spoken and are telling you that our Second Amendment shall not be infringed.
10-Round Limit for Magazines
Virginia Tech was the site of the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. Seung-Hui Cho used two of the smallest caliber hand guns manufactured and a handful of ten round magazines. There are no substantial facts that prove that limited magazines would make any difference at all. Second, this is just another law that endangers law-abiding citizens. I’ve heard you ask, “why does someone need 30 bullets to kill a deer?”
Let me ask you this: Why would you prefer criminals to have the ability to out-gun law-abiding citizens? Under this policy, criminals will still have their 30-round magazines, but the average American will not. Whose side are you on?
Lastly, when did they government get into the business of regulating “needs?” This is yet another example of government overreaching and straying from its intended purpose.
I admire this students courage to write a hand written letter to the president. I believe that if there are more people like this student, Mr. president will start to listen. I truely hope that Obama read the letter, because the student made some thourough points.
On February 7, 2013, approximately 150 years to the date when President Abraham Lincoln delivered his 'Emancipation Proclamation", the State of Mississippi at long last joined the rest of the United States..."
It is rather interesting to note...that the movie “Lincoln”, which involved a bunch of white people sitting around discussing slavery, should inspire a state to finally see to it that they’re on the record being against slavery, whereas films depicting the actual evils of slavery on African Americans, like “Roots“, “Amistad”, or “A Woman Called Moses”, weren’t able to provoke the same reaction."
Congress is slowly beginning to impeach Obama! Obama violated the rules that he must seek congressional approval before using military, and he did not. A clear violation of article 2, section 4 of the constitution.
We need to pass a law! People who look like you and live where you live are being killed! Voters hear this and vote with their emotions. Something is wrong; we need a law to fix it. The media doesn't cover those Chicago shootings nearly as much.
Brianna Moore's insight:
I really like this article. It talks about how we can't stop or prevent mass shootings and murders, and no law can either. But we can "excersice" the power of our 2nd ammendment rights and start carrying concealed weapons. The article says "Allow and encourage people to carry concealed. It will create a self-defense mentality and will make criminals think twice about shooting up a movie theater." No, I do not think this will stop all shootings, but it's worth a try.