Sandy Hook, devistating

On December 14, 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School, things were going normal. It was a , normal school day. However, at 9:35 things were to drastically change/

Adam Lanza, 20, was first at home, where he shot his mother, Nancy Lanza, 52, in the head 4 times with a .22 Marlin rifle. He then went to wheer his mother taught at; Sandy Hook Elementary. It was around 9:35 that he shot down the doors of Sandy Hook, and apparently went shot two administrators. Then, he went to his mother's classroom, and shot 15 out of 16 children dead. The survivor, a six year old girl, said that she played dead until she knew everything was over. Then, after wounding 2 more women, and killing 2 more teachers, it is said that he commited suicide and shot  himself in the head before authorities arrived.

It is also said that Adam did this because of all the attention his mother was giving her class and not him. His brother told sources this.

In my opinion, which is probably like other's opinion, this is terrible. First of all, he was 20 years old. Wanting attention from his mother at this age makes him seem like a little kid. Also, if he did want attetnion, why would he kill his mother? On top of that, because you killed your mother, who was the reason you were angry, why would you kill the children? They didn't ask for the attention! He knew he was wrong, because he shot himself afterwards. Therefore, no one can blame this on a disease, or mental disability. Which I find very interesting. Because he was Caucasian, they tried to make it seem like he had a mental disabilty, but if he was African-American, he would have been a cold blooded, sinister man. That's very funny to me.

That's honestly how I feel.

Regulation of guns

Before I begin this article, I'd like to say that regulating something means you create rules for it.

In the article, "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?" Nicholas D. Kristof brings to light the idea of regulating guns. He gives a statistic that children from age 5 to 14 are 13 times more likely to be murdered with guns. Kristof also said that we know that the U.S. won't ban guns, but can at least create rules to reduce the murders.

He said that children in American schools have safety in school with codes and what not. Also, that the buses are double-checked for saftey and that even the food from the cafeteria is checked for saftey. However, Kristof feels as though we don't care much for the things that are more likely to kill us.

Kristof states that The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has a five page book on regualtions of ladders, but shrugs at the thought of regulating firearms. Ladders kill about 300 Americans a year, whereas guns, 30,000. I think you can see where he was going.

Kristof compares regukating guns to the way cars are regulated. "I understand: shooting is fun! But so is driving, and we accept that we must wear seqat belts, use headlights at night, and fill out forms to buy a car. Why can't we be equally adult about regulating guns?" Kristoff said. Basically, he's saying that if we can buy cars, and accept the rules that go along with that, why can't we buy a gun with the same type system.

Later in the article, Kristof says that people often say that it's not the gun that kills people, but it's the crazy or psycho who does it. However, he said that when someone get's in a car accident, we don't shrug and say "Cars don't kill people, drunks do."

I agree that we should regulate guns. Like Kristof said, the U.S. won't ban guns, so why can't we just have a few rules to make the possess of guns safer. I liked the way he compared the regulations of cars to regulating guns. It showed how simple it would be to regulate guns. However, not all people follow the rules of driving (which is why we have drunk drivers.) With that being said, if people don't always follow the rules of driving, why would they follow the rules of possessing a gun.

With all of that being said, I guess I'm in the middle of the idea of regulating guns. If we do, people might feel safer, but in all reality, not all people will follow the rules. So it's like, we regulate them, but what's the point?
 

Why get arrested for small amounts of marijuana?

The article "Marijuana law just creates criminals," talks about the injustice of arrest of people with small amounts of marijuana. The author, Hakeem Jeffries, stated that the majority of these people are black and latino. Jeffries said that in New york, this law was dropped. Meaning that if you have a small amount of marijuana, you won't go to jail. However, New York police do something called "stop and frisk." This allows the police to stop anyone they want and tell them to empty their pockets. Now, if the person has marijuana, it's seen, and the police can arrest them, even if it's a small amount.

Jeffries also stated that this is unfair due to the people they frisk. He said that a lot of white young people have a large possession of marijuana, but the police rarely check them. This is bad because, now they have a lower chance in doing anything in life. Their lives basically "spiral downward," Jeffries said. He said that possession of marijuana is a crrime, or is not a crime, but it can't be bad for one group, and okay for another.

In my opinion, I totally agree with Jeffires. I mean, to me, marijuana is terrible, but if you're going to have a small possession, why is it a huge crime? If it's going to be a crime, then it needs to be a crime to everyone, not just a certain group. Crimes are supposed to be illegal to everyone, not just a specific group of people.

Also, I don't think the police should just go around frisking people. Unless you have a search warrant, I don't want you frisking me. I don't care if I have marijuana or not, it's just not polite to frisk people all willy-nilly. That's just how I feel.

Jovan Belcher, Cheifs football player, dead with girlfriend

In the article "Tradegy in KC," the author brings to light the death of Jovan Belcher and his girlfriend. The article states that Jovan first shot his girlfriend, Kasandra Perkins, then shot himself. The way it went down, however, was tragic.

According to the article, Belcher first shot his girlfriend, with whom he had a 3-month daughter with. Then, he went to his home stadium. He was saying his final goodbyes to his coach. With suspicions, the coaches called the cops. Just as the cops arrived, Belcher shot himself in the head; in front of everyone in sight.

This story has many different ways to look at it. I heard that he and his girlfriend had just came back from a Trey Songz concert, and that she was pverly hype over Trey, so Jovan shot her. Then he didn't want to go to jail for life, so he shot himself. However, he may have been going through a rough time, and just went crazy. He shot his girlfriend, then shot himself. What makes it worse is that now their baby doesn't have any parents. He also could have been just a murderer and shot his girl, and didn't want to do life in jail. Either way you put it, the sotry is just a tradegy.

When I first heard about this, I didn't even know he had a daughter. Her exsistence makes this whole thing a different situation. She has to grow up with no parents. She's too young to even remember them. It's just so sad. I apologize to the short length of this blog, but there's not much to say about it. It was tragic

New Information On Casey Anthony's Murder Case

In the article "Evidence missed in Fla. girl's case," the author (doesn't say) talks about the missed information that was missed during Casey Anthony's trial. They have found that the day Caylee, Casey's daughter, went missing, there was a computer search on "fool-proof suffication," evidently spelling suffocation wrong. After this was searched, the person clicked on an article that talked about suicide that involved posion and putting a bag over someone's head. The history of the browser then recorded that this person got on MySpace, which was Casey's, not her father's.

This evidence came out before the trial began, but no one said anything. Everyone assumed that the father had searched it, wanting to kill himself after Caylee drowned.

But, not knowing about this, everyone thought that Caylee was poisoned with chloroform and then suffocated by duct tape being placed on her nose and mouth. They could have found out the truth, but Caylee's body was too decomposed to do an autopsy.

Of course, everyone wished they had this information sooner, but it's too late...

In my opinion, I truly don't care. Whatever happened, happened. She deserves a private case like anyone else in the world. I'm minding my business. Do I think she's wrong? I don't know. I don't know the entire story to make a decision. But, in all reality, she's human. The media needs to leave this case alone. It happened four years ago, and she already pleaded guilty. She's guilty. No evidence can help her get out of jail. Oh well. That's her fault.

Sorry I don't have a lot of opinion, but that's really how I feel

Mixed Emotions To The President's Re-election

The article "Yay! Boo! So? Reactions to Obama win vary" talks about the different emotions shared about President Obama's re-election. Different people felt different ways. Some people felt happy, some people felt angry, while others were in the middle.

"I'm a little bit disappointed," Marty Brenna, 49, said, "I wasn't really happy with either candidate." According to Marty, Obama ran a better campaign, therefore his voting turnout was higher.

However, Barbara Drucker, who is 61 says, "I'm thrilled to death. I would never have voted for Romney on women's issues alone." Barbara feels that because Obama killed Osama Bin Laden, and saved the auto industry, that's how he got 4 more years.

"I'm not happy. I haven't had a job in over a year," Chuck Rihl, 51, said. Clearly, he is angry about the entire situation.

"In contrary to what these 3 people said, Lisa Pierce, a 30 year old, says, "I'm pretty indiffernet. Either way, they need to get their act together." Pierce didn't vote, and we can clearly see why. She believes that the politicians are out of touch with the "real-world" issues.

That's just a few of the comments from the article, but most people felt like this. Either they were happy, angry, or they just didn't care for either one of them.

I'm ecstatic about Obama getting 4 more years. I feel that he is trying his best to make a change. The people that are angry about his second term are clearly not understanding. Obama promised change, and we are getting just the change we need. It's just that some people are too blind to see that the world is changing.

Also, I think that people think Barack is a robot that can do multiple things at once. HE IS HUMAN!!!! Change isn't going to come over night, and I think that's where some people think. They think that Obama is supposed to change the world over night. It's going to be hard to do that, because of the president before him. If it weren't for Obama's first election, I think we would all be underwater. However, Obama did his best to change it, and he succeeded.

Is the world perfect, and doesn't need more change? No! But I feel that we can't push all of our problems on Obama. If we want a change, then we need to help him make that change. In his speech, he clearly says "Yes We Can!" That "We" is not just him, Michelle, and the two girls. The "WE" is for all of us. The "WE" is for the United States of America to help Barack Obama make the change we want. So I guess the main question is, "Do we really want change?" Because if we did, then would not be crying and being angry, we would do the little things to help Obama. But the change first starts in us.

Hurricane Sandy Brings Climate Changes to Light

In the article "Will Climate Change Get Some Respect Now?" Nicholas D. Kristof brings to light the climate changes that are happening in the world today.

The article states that, because Hurricane Sandy came, it brought to light this one question: "Isn't it time to talk not only about weather, but also about climate?"

"You can't say any one single event is reflective of a climate change," William Solecki said. Kristof even said that not every storm is caused because of a climate change. "But it's illustrative of the conditions and events and scenarios that we expect with climate change." Solecki added. With that being said, the article states that Sandy may not have been caused due to a climate change, but whatever it was, the storm is opening many eyes to climate changes.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is from New York, said he recently told Obama "we have a 100-year flood every two years now." The article says that this is actually true. Therefore, the article encourages you to brace yourself for a few reasons:

1- Hurricanes are formed when the ocean is warm, and the warmth is their fuel. This summer, the Atlantic waters were at a record high temperature. Most of this was natural, and some of it was due to human-created climate changes.

2- According to computer models, hurricanes won't happen more often, or more frequently, but they might become more stronger. "The intensity of these storms is most likely to increase in this century," the Untited States Global Change Research Program says.

3- Because climate changes add moisture to the atmosphere, there is a strong possiblilty that the storms may come with more rain and flooding.

4- Sandy was destructive because it couldn't move back out to sea by a "blocking pattern." A recent study said that melting sea ice from the Artic may be the cause of the blocking.

Yes, politicians dropped the situation of climate changes, but so have those in the news business. The article says that, "the number of articles about climate change fell by 41 percent from 2009-2011, according to DailyClimate.org."

There aren't easy solutions to fix the climate change, but we can do a few things. We especially need stronger FEMA. (because we need stronger FEMA, this makes Romney's suggestions to privitize it dumb.)

At first, I didn't even know what a climate change was. But, I looked it up, and it found out what it meant. So, I feel that we as a people need to understand that climate changes are no joke. We could really be affected by them if we don't watch out for them. I didn't even know that climate changes were that serious, but, according to this article, they truly are. I don't know why we have climate changes, the article didn't really make that clear. But, I do know that we need to help stop them. However, 1 person can' make this happen. I'd need the whole world to help. From politicians, all the way down to homeless people. We all need to help stop these changes