Americans have always had guns. Something else has changed in the social equation.
I believe it has to do with the need to be famous, the willingness of some sick people to go to the most horrific lengths to achieve that, and the role the media play.
While we welcome the debate over divestment, it's disappointing that Bryce and the Journal are leaving out key facts about the promise of renewables and Bryce's own industry affiliations.
By going on Twitter and demanding Obama take action while Murdoch's highest profile property in the United States actively tries to silence debate about gun reform, the media baron either revealed himself to be a hypocrite of historic proportions, or clueless about Fox News' content.
To blame the violence in Newtown, Connecticut on Asperger's or a personality disorder, as many media outlets currently are, is a serious mistake.
Conservatives have argued that guns = freedom, and that there should be no limit on such freedom. The president trumped their argument: The price of not protecting the nations' children is too high. Permitting the mass murder of our children is not freedom.
Arguments against reasonable, limited gun control are not based on empirical positions but on subjective gut-feelings. The reasons offered to oppose gun control are emotional responses meant to divert the argument from the evidence.
When a government becomes invisible, it becomes unaccountable. To expose its lies, errors, and illegal acts is not treason, it is a moral responsibility. Leaks become the lifeblood of the Republic.
Spitzer and Matalin debate whether the GOP can shift on Immigration to avoid political suicide and on guns to reduce homocides. That's up to the Norquist of Guns -- Wayne LaPierre -– to allow NRA-owned electeds to stop the slaughter.
The nation has come together, as it always does, during a moment of tragedy. But every day thousands of tragedies go unseen. Would we be as divided as we are if those tragedies were as immediate and visible as the deaths in Newtown?
Dear Members of the Media: You already know that furious parents across the country feel it's inappropriate to shove a microphone in the face of a traumatized 8-year-old. But have you ever wondered why? It's because we will remember. I remember.
The elephant in the room today is this terrible tragedy that occurred in Newtown, Connecticut, which may be the saddest thing I've seen in the news since I started writing here in 2007.
As The X Factor comes to an end this week, I wonder what will become of the show in its third season. Even though Simon Cowell and Demi Lovato bicker like a petulant teenager and irksome uncle, I quite like their relationship. I never thought they would share much chemistry, but the 'X Factor' duo has been delightful to watch, which made me think of other pairs on other shows that have been a surprising treat.
While it's unfortunate that Ryan should have been cast into the spotlight in such a way (one of many tragic things to befall him on Friday), it's not the Internet that's to blame, but Internet-era journalism.
There can be no doubt that blanket media coverage of monstrosities like school shootings can have the effect of making additional such gruesome incidents more likely.
Our culture, in which the draw of violence is turbo-charged, glamorized and commercialized, clearly plays a pivotal role in the psychological problems of an alarmingly growing number of young men who commit wanton murder.
The tobacco industry has long sold smoking by portraying it as cool. The tobacco industry itself has not gone away but it has certainly been forced to curb its marketing practices to be more responsible. That is what must happen with guns, too.
Because I'm a mother, I'm often asked how these school shootings make me feel. And I'll tell you how they make me feel. They make me feel unbelievably angry.
Editors debated the ethics of displaying children's faces in photos or whether or not journalists in Newtown had the right to interview children without their parents' consent. Tweets were hesitantly composed, but as one editor said, "What can we possibly say? It's awful. That's it."
What is protected in the First Amendment is not the right of commercial enterprises to exploit the news for profit, but rather of citizens to become informed. That requires the courage of heroic sources, including Bradley Manning.
William Laney, 2012.17.12