Just reading the first line I knew it was going to be an opinniated article about the Sandy hook shooting. Then the author just states that he has an opinion and I figured he would literally share it throughout his article. I think he takes a jab at the democrats more than the republicans even though he does it in a subtle way by just saying where his loyalty lies. He is refuting all types of solution that people have proposed and then goes on about autistic medication. I am fundamentally bias here because I work and have worked with autistic children. I have seen normal children . Crimes are opportunities you take away the opportunity you likely diminish the potential of the crime. I do agree about having administrators having guns in school which can be a plausible solutions because having guns in a classroom is dangerous too with children knowing where the gun is. I also agree with his theory that certain guns shouldn’t just be limited to the police but I agree that guns that have high magazine and are automatic should be banned from purchase by regular Joes. I also disagree that banning guns is somewhat equal to banning cars that can speed because people don’t commit mass murders using their cars.
I really don’t think that the author in general is very credible. I think he is an independent writer for the examiner who is not affiliated to any news background. He gives an opinion but I don’t see it as being very critical or logical at that. He refuses to address the big elephant in the room but tries lightly to throw the blame all over.
Helena, Kurtis. “CT School Shooting.” Examiner. 18 Dec. 2012. Web.