The Gun Free Zone Safety Net has a Gaping Hole in It

Gun Free Zones rely on the principle all citizens follow the rules. The Gun Free Zone sign is meant to remind citizens unauthorized individuals face severe penalties if caught carrying a gun within a believed school zone. Hillary Clinton stands behind it. Donald Trump promises to get rid of it.

The Gun Free Zone Act was signed into law in 1990. The idea is a safety net protecting Americans from deadly shooting sprees. In a utopian society the idea would work flawlessly. Citizens would never lie. Little signs would turn back the Virginia Tech shooter from murdering innocent students. Columbine would never have happened.

Reality proves gun free zones have done nothing for school shootings. Killers are not deterred by ´that´s illegal´ threats. History shows a pattern of violence being greatest in ´soft target´ area. The gun free zone is a neon sign there is no opposition to fear. Police stations and gun shows rarely find themselves assaulted by gun shootings because they provide an actual threat a shooter will be stopped before achieving their goal.

Critics insisting the Gun Free Zone, while not able to stop shooters, still provides protection from regular gun carriers are naive. The former high school I attended had its first shooting experience at a basketball game held in their gym. One parent, unauthorized with no legal carry allowance, pulled a gun on another over family matters. The Gun Free Zone was clearly marked. The perpetrator was carrying illegally with complete disregard of the ´safety net.´ He fired several shots at the person whom the disagreement was with before being subdued. The Gun Free Zone did nothing to prevent this. Would another parent legally carrying a gun have helped the situation before it escalated? Perhaps. Perhaps it would have backfired leading to serious injuries. 

The greater question asks ´why do we insist on gun-free zones when they are proven not to be effective?´ Do the American people need a sign pointing to places where dutiful citizens are going to be helpless to defend themselves? If Gun Free Zones are little more than guns with an x marked through them should Americans feel safe? Let´s hope not. 

American Media Gives Hillary Clinton Free Pass on Policy

America´s news coverage of Hillary Clinton is about as

useful as celebrity gossip magazines. Questions on foreign policy plans for America´s role in the Libyan disaster have been replaced with opinion pieces on Clinton´s imminent win over Donald Trump. Bo Copley´s legitimate concern over the future of coal mining flashed by with ludicrous speed. American soldiers are dying in foreign wars without a tweet to mourn their passing. Clinton is being asked about her defense against Donald Trump´s attacks on her husband´s infidelity. American media is asking all the wrong questions and its´ citizens will pay the price.

Clinton´s continual focus on gun control is a heinous example of this. Clinton´s campaign exploits of gun victims in the media blasts America´s right to bear arms. Executive orders by Clinton will begin placing further restrictions on who is able to legally purchase a gun. These are irrelevant when guns are easily smuggled over the border from Mexico. Clinton´s belief in strangleholds on legitimate buyers are not going to be followed by illegal sellers. Heroin is illegal to purchase in the United States yet the law has never hindered users from finding the means to procure it nor will laws stop illegal gun purchases. Reporters should be asking how Clinton intends to tightly secure the border against all contraband before she begins a mistaken crusade to penalize law-abiding legal gun owners.

Finally, if the American media will not ask the most important question then I beg the global media to do it: Hillary Clinton what is your EXACT plan on America´s future role in global affairs? No BS on ´we will do our best´ or ´work with our allies.´ The Clinton Foundation´s shady past of convenient donations followed by favors from Clinton´s stint as secretary of state has cost thousands of lives. How can global citizens, NOT government leaders, believe America has enough decency to do what is right in this world.  

Why does your nation keep meddling in foreign affairs when the beneficiary is clearly not the people? The world is not talking about the Iraq war under Bush but the Libyan debacle under your tenure as Secretary of State. No sane individual believes the split decision where the most important guidance came from the lips of the SOS did not sway the president´s decision. What benefit was the coup in Honduras which the media tiptoed around leaving Americans in the dark about their role? Obama quakes under Putin´s glare while relations sour before being saved. Why should America be trusted to a 3rd term of an administration which has done so much global destruction? 

Good-bye Felons. Hello ´Person Who Committed a Crime´ as Your Newest Coworker

The Office of Justice program has unleashed the politically correct ´less disparaging label´ for convicts

and felons on the American people. Felons and convicts are now to be labeled as ´person who committed a crime´ and ´individual who was incarcerated.´ The idea is to ¨remove barriers¨ for those leaving prison to reintegrate into society. President Obama announced a plans which would require federal agencies to do their part employing background checks only at the final phase of hiring. Executive presidential orders from Hillary Clinton would ensure the new regulations are standard in American society.

The thought is interesting. The reality is terrifying. Convicts and felons do deserve a second chance at becoming successful members of law-abiding communties. Glossing over their crimes is not the way to accomplish it. The regulations umbrella does not differentiate between crimes committed. Money laundering is a crime. Murder is a crime. Shoplifting is a crime. Rape is a crime. Employers face the agonizing choice of taking the gamble on what crime their future employee committed. 

American parents cringe at the placement of convicted child molesters allowed housing in their neighborhood.The thought of a person convicted of multiple accounts of money laundering in the financial department of their local banks should make them wary of where to place their savings. Persons with repeated jail time over dealing prescription pain killers are a dangerous wager for work in the store pharmacy. With employers only hint being ´committed a crime´  and ´individual who was incarcerated´ puts their livelihood at risk. There is little forgiveness if the media uncovers a rape at the local high school was the school´s error for hiring a person who served time for multiple rape accounts. 

The lasting result of one mishire leading to a crime makes it more difficult for businesses to take a risk on choosing a candidate ´who committed a crime´ over the less experienced crime free applicant. Wariness over an unknown will hurt those who have reformed chances at integrating into society. Offer a second chance but do so without risking the trust of law-abiding Americans. The Office of Justice would be wise to consider this before making another politically correct decision.

Hillary Clinton´s Woman Card is Sadder than Her Campaign Slogan

Hillary Clinton´s woman card has netted her a tidy

profit of $2.4 million. Instead of donating the money to causes for women it will go towards funding a campaign which has forgotten how intelligent women are. From the disastrous comments of Gloria Steinem to Maragret Thatcher´s own political gaffe the Clinton campaign is a mess of women contradictions. 

The Clinton campaign has brutally toted the idea Hillary is THE answer to women garnering the respect they deserve. The idea of a woman with historically unheard of untrustworthy polling numbers being the one to ´save´ us is hilarious. Women do deserve their turn in the White House. One day it will happen but the day Hillary Clinton takes her Oval Office throne will not be it. What will our children think when they are old enough to ask the question: what did Hillary Clinton do to deserve this honor? 

She is under investigation by the FBI. Her supporters will claim conspiracy and ´security review´ but the FBI itself called it an investigation. Her emails reveal a women rife with political scandals which have been a disaster for all Americans, not just the women. Read her own words not the main stream media spin or yesterday´s speeches before crying ´it´s an attack on all women.´ Do not make the mistake of believing women are incapable of seeing the truth. Our children will be raised in a world where gender does not overrule the ability for a president to make good choices. Gender should not define a voter´s decision to choose who is poised to take this country to a stronger place. 

Hillary Clinton´s own political slogan is a pander towards women claiming ´I´m with Her.´ Why is it not ´I´m with the person most capable to lead this country. Where are the words which speak to the American people? ´I´m with her´ sounds more like a child´s t-shirt slogan. ´I´m with her,´ the lady over there is my mother. ´I´m with her´ could even be an excellent shirt for my puppy. He belongs to me therefore ´I´m with her.´ A world where voter´s follow a slogan implying they need to point out who they are with is a sad one. If Hillary Clinton hopes to win over America´s vote she should start with analyzing her own view of them. No voter needs a card reminding them of their own sex. The next time I spot one I will be asking ´when was the last time you used the funds for that card to support a women´s cause, not just Hillary Clinton´s?´

Hillary Clinton´s Million Dollar Super Pac of Trolls

Hillary Clinton´s campaign is unleashing its´ latest

combat scheme: Operation troll. The soft explanation for the super-pac is to set negative rumors straight, protect supporters, and give them a safe place to voice Hillary support. There are thousands of places where this already exists. No one needs to spend a dime of super pac funds to do it. What the latest super pac is about is shutting up the free speech opinions of non-paid voices. 

The pathetic truth is how bland a candidate must be to pay its supporters for their enthusiasm. The idea is not new. Twitter has found thousands of Hillary followers do not exist. Facebook likes can easily be purchased. YouTube offers the opportunity to purchase ´views´ to boost a video´s popularity. No one batted an eye at funding background enthusiasm but paying trolls will turn calm commentary debates into insult battles.

Furious Trump supporters on Reddit have devoted posts calling for memes to piss off the ´ole bitch.´ Pacifist users have flooded calmer plans to deal with paid trolls. Ignore their antics. Hit the dislike button. Move on to serious political discussions over a candidate instead of personal attacks on a person´s mental capacity. Paid supporters will find a wall blocking their attempts to ´protect´ Hillary Clinton. 

The true supporter will face the repercussions of a wasted million dollar attempt to win over voters. Why listen to a supporter who may just be parroting what they are being paid to say? Even worse is the respect lost when a supporter needs cuddling to speak up about their political beliefs. This is the internet. If a commenter is offensive they are within their rights to move on. No one is a martyr for staying in a rude conversation over political beliefs. Stop acting the victim. No one is respecting you for it.

Bernie Sanders is Going to Vatican City (and Here´s Why)

BBC News released the newest example of media ignorance

entitled ´US Elections: Bernie Sanders Invited to Vatican by Pope.´ Before the public´s heads start spinning with political dramatics the facts have to be examined. Chancellor Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo invited Bernie Sanders to the Vatican City State for the Centesimus Annus 25 Years later. 

The Centesimus Annus is a symposium held by the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Pope John Paul II established the Potifical Academy of Social Sciences in 1994 ¨so that the Holy Father and all Vatican offices would have access to the most current social scientific research relevant to the Church’s teaching.¨ Three years prior Saint John Paul II had begun the church´s efforts to improve the content of church teaching through interactions with social scientists. The 25 Years Later Centesimus Annus symposium participants will discuss the question of how the past 25 years have changed the world´s ¨situation-economically, politically, and culturally.¨ Secondly the symposium ¨will investigate how Catholic social teaching has engaged the world in order to ask how best the Church can do so in the coming years and decades.¨

The two day event will go as follows: One participant will present their authored paper on the subject being discussed.  They are followed by a respondent. All participants then discuss the information presented. Lunch, dinner, and coffee break will be provided for both days of the symposium. The full itinerary detailing the participants and papers to be discussed is in the official conference booklet on the PASS site.

Bernie Sanders is not listed to present an authored paper but The Academy´s statement of ¨generous listening to the multiplicity of “grass-roots” groups and movements around the globe¨ points to Bernie Sanders as a welcome part of the discussion. His invitation by Chancellor Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo suggests an appreciation of common ground in the issue of climate change, a topic which will be part of the Academy´s agenda. The invitation to be part of the symposium is a landmark in Sander´s grassroot campaign movement. His views have now expanded beyonded the race for Democratic nominee to an international discussion. 

__________

The offical press release from the Bernie Sanders campain:
 https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-visit-vatican-city

For more information on the Centeminus Annus symposium (and the quotes) visit: http://www.pass.va/content/scienzesociali/en/events/2014-18/centesimus_annus.html

Author

L.Krause
Freelance writer with a sense of humor and passion for politics

Hillary´s Campaign Needs to Up Their Game

Hillary Clinton has the best campaign managers money and

politics can buy. She should be steam-rolling Bernie Sanders into submission. The people on her team are veterans in the art of winning elections. They run campaigns capable of reducing most opposing candidates to tears of frustration. Make no mistake about it, they are intelligent men and women with a staggering amount of experience. Millenials shoud be slavishly following Hillary except they aren´t. Bernie Sanders is besting their campaign manipulations and here´s why.

1. They don´t ´comprehend´ the unheard of Bernie Sanders approach to politics. Bernie Sanders is unusual in the world of politics, he may even be an enigma. His ads do not feature Hillary Clinton and her shady background. They do not start as ´Hillary Clinton has...´ or ´Hillary Clinton would...´ so vote for me because her negativities are destroying you. Bernie Sanders ads focus on the people not the person running opposite of him. Campaign ads are not supposed to do that. Traditional campaigns slam one person for their choices in hope voters will be scared into avoiding someone who is shadier than thou. By not pointing traditional fingers Bernie Sanders will continue to distance himself in terms of trustworthiness.

2. They don´t comprehend the beauty of the internet. Statements made in previous elections could be taken as true because very few people were able to go back and research the details. Now anything said can be typed into Google. Hillary is not used to just how easily she can be refuted with the touch of a finger. Claim you did not know where Bernie was while fighting for health care begins a hilarious joke when a video easily surfaces where he is standing literally behind you. Hillary´s campaign must fully understand the consequence of her every statement in a world where the past is now accessed by anyone with access to the world wide web.

3. They underestimate the power of millenial voters. Millenial voters have been raised in a different world then the one Hillary´s political aspirations began. They have a different way of thinking about the world. Flaunting ´she has more experience´ does not cut it today. Millenials are looking for a candidate who is focused on their future. Hillary Clinton´s recent behaviors are on the forefront in the millenial mind. Hillary´s supporters  bring up her work done in the early nineties but many millenials are either to young to recall them or weren´t even born. This may actually be an advantage to Hillary as her past is not exactly known for being saintly.

4. They entirely miss the boat when it comes to ´tone.´ I was shocked at the statements made by Hillary supporters Gloria Steinem and Margaret Thatcher. ´Scolding´ potential female voters on their lack of feminism for not voting for a female felt humiliating. Throw in the recent CNN Benenson interview where Hillary´s campaign complained over Bernie´s negativity felt downright petty. Attempts to ply voters by continually playing the sexist card is poorly done even damaging. The campaign reeks of condescension when Hillary scolds Bernie supporters with her ´I pity them´ statements. Expecting voters to not understand why certain debate days are ridiculous on her behalf makes even supporters question why she doesn´t want to show off her prowess in the spotlight. She can point the finger at Bernie´s tone all she likes. The more she does it, the less respect is gained. To be a strong woman one should be fighting not whining over how ´unfair´ politics are.

5. They fail at facing scandal. Hillary Clinton´s trustworthy ratings are not just bad compared to Bernie Sanders, they are disastrous. She ducks the issues. She throws excuses. Bernie Sanders bluntly says what he means. Instead of continually blaming the GOP, Bernie supporters, and every scapegoat imaginable their candidate MUST take a stance. If Hillary Clinton has no intention of ever releasing the transcripts to her Goldman Sachs speeches then call a press conference to say so. If she is innocent of wrongdoing in her tenure as Secretary of State then step up and publically take a united stance. If she wants to continue using Super PACs which support fossil fuel use then admit it. The American people have grown wary of the media. They do not like being told what ´should be´ by a panel of ´experts´ instead of a candidate themselves. Secondhand statements will never receive the respect of a candidate proudly declaring their own words loud and clear. Until her campaign does damage control expect a lot more hilarious memes in the future.