DOCJT- Agreed. I just wish there was a way to actually reach kids and make them understand that things like this are not the answer. Life is a beautiful thing. When you're 15, every day can seem like the biggest issue in your life, but it's all insignificant when you extrapolate out over the course of a lifetime.

it's good to know that somewhere out on the east coast, another kid thought enough of life to give the tip.

I hope they get them mental health help...and keep them for a while.

You can rest assured the police have evidence or they wouldn't have released the names. They aren't going to put what they have out into the media at this point. Your defense of these thugs is hard to understand.

Swagganaut....Better than "sorting out" other kids bodies later...

Swagganaut - here is some ice. Now stop banging your head against these stone people.

I think someone sounds like a defense attorney. I am glad they got caught before they did something. The police must have thought it was pretty serious. A lot of people make threats, but there must have been more to it. It is a good thing that they were caught before there was a body count.

Jaker The Snaker

I just wish there was a way to actually reach kids and make them understand that things like this are not the answer. Life is a beautiful thing. When you're 15, every day can seem like the biggest issue in your life

I wish there was a way too but unfortunately there is people who will be totally indifferent to the "life is a beautiful thing speech" and who already have a criminal mind even at 15 (and even earlier). (13 year old raped and killed teacher: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086702/Brian-Wonsom-Student-raped-killed-teacher-THIRTEEN-sentenced-85-years-bars.html ). Teenagers have issues just like adults, maybe not for the same reasons, but whatever is happening at the moment will seem important, whether it is a breakup or something else, and whether you are a teenager or an adult, but it normally doesn't turn you into a murderer. Don't generalise (as if every teenager would think of murdering people because of their issue of the day) nor minimise their plot to kill people (its just as bad whether the person is an adult or not), these 2 are not your average teenager, they seem to have pretty big issues (assuming they actually intended to kill people).

Umm, Swag? Who said you have the right to every piece of evidence they have? Perhaps they haven't released all the evidence and that is their right, but the trash part of this is your assumption that the author had all the materials and was too lazy to post them instead of that police investigation thing where they aren't required to list everything they have for you online to see.

Really, seems you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder.

To those who are up in arms about the evidence or lack thereof, please remember, we live in a day & age where people are killed randomly seemingly all the time. No need to bring up the recent incidents, is there? Since that's just how things are anymore, how would it make you feel if authorities ignored the tipster only to have these kids follow through on their threats and actually do harm to someone? The authorities HAVE TO ACT, even if the tip is bogus. Too many random killings taking place for them to NOT do something. And conversely, if the tip IS bogus, then not only should the tipster be prosecuted, but I think it would be totally fair if the kids sought reparations for wrongful arrest.

In the meantime, until more is known, I'm inclined to side with law enforcement on this one.

I don't have a horse here but I like to ride.

Swagg: I agree this was not worth reporting. We know that allegedly some kid allegedly told another kid that that something was being planned. We don't know what that was. Kudos to the kid that reported it.

The police had to investigate this, that is their job. However, they did not have to report it to the media, especially if they are going to scrimp on the details. There was no reason to release their names. A one paragraph press release: We were notified this morning of an alleged threat to one of our local high schools. We have two suspects in custody and an investigation is on going. We will release more details as we complete the investigation, if appropriate. Professional, factual, and to the point.

3,350-student campus

Is that a high school or a prison?

NBCLite is the way to describe this. MSNBC very rarely writes, or posts, a complete (or even close to complete) story.

"Police Lt. Tony Conrad said he could not release additional information about
the threat because the case involves minors and has been referred to the
Riverside County District Attorney’s office for review." - From the Riverside Press Enterprise

Suggestion: When you see a story here on NBCLite, google the town name and the topic. You will get much more information. NBCLite is a decent index for news stories (unless it reflects badly on some notable progressive/cause).

And what caused these teens to fantasize on the demise of a fellow student? What actions, if any, did the potential victim do to deserve the "guilty" parties to plot their demise?

No information, just yellow journalism.

It would be stupid to release any information that will be used in any case that may come up in the future. If that makes a story seem incomplete, than there is a good reason for it. That is the critical evidence.

And the parents of these kids are ?????

Clearly the parents did not teach things like moral values, respect for others, value of human life, etc. Tragedy for all concerned.

ahhh..."pair" is the noun that particular verb is associated with Allan.........

TWO students WERE arrested, but a PAIR of students WAS arrested.

So no, it shouldn't be.

fail

You both might want to do some research on singular/plural verb association with the word "pair" -- both was and were are correct; it's personal style in this case.

Eberyones of yins might could gets a life.

I think it makes no darn difference about the correctness of "was" or "were". Get a frigging life. It's NOT that important. That is unless you're going to be English police and have people arrested. Are you THAT serious? Really!!!!

Oh, you're in Jr. High School and need to show how intelligent you are.

I don't correct anyone's grammar, but some people are overly sensitive. Maybe they didn't do well in school and they have a knee jerk reaction to being corrected.

Yeah, it could even cause them to plot mass murder.

No, Krullulon, it is NOT a matter of "style." "Pair," like "team" or "group" or ... is a collective singular noun and calls for a singular verb form. INFORMALLY, some may more intuitively use the plural because we are uncomfortable treating groups of humans like a collective, but grammatically, for Standard Academic English, "was" is correct in this instance. And no, I'm not trying to be a "grammar nazi," but I AM a college English prof for U of F, so I am speaking from professional expertise. I know it's a minor detail , but for some of us, such errors can be distracting if they accumulate. It's one thing for anyone to use the "intuitive" plural informally, but PROFESSIONAL journalists would/should (as the writer did here) adhere to SAE even when it "feels" intuitively incorrect.

So...the parents should be responsible for their children's thought crimes? You are pathetic.

Z933870- I suspect your kids have not preformed to your satisfaction and certainly would not want to be responsible for them killing their classmates and school employees.

You surly are using "thought" loosely. There was no thought here, just evil. Whether loss of decent genetics, environment or parenting. If a child is raised with work ethics, honesty, respect for others, etc.. they have too much to lose to even have these thoughts. Kids today need more time doing productive activities, in my day it was called "work". They have no purpose, so no future and nothing to lose. Thusly we all lose.

Telling a kid how wonderful he is because he wiped his ass today isn't working for our society. Parents ' expectations from their kids are so low that it has dumbed down our society that we spend so much of our time and money on just protecting ourselves from this nonsense than being a productive nation.

At some point I would like to believe society will start standing up for itself and put an end to people dropping kids and letting the rest of us deal with the aftermath.

rjw007 there are plenty of kids that end up criminals that were brought up in great homes with awesome parents. Some kids are just born psychopaths or sociopaths and nothing can be done to fix that.

@rjw007

As someone from Temecula, you should try living in the Inland Empire and see if it doesn't drive you insane or bore you to death.

um...if your kid shows a preference to murder, I doubt you could have done anything to prevent it short of calling the cops yourself.

IF you saw signs of some kind of mental instability, or some other problems, then it is your responsibility to get your kid help

These kids have some serious mental issues. Stop blaming the parents.

rjw007. So far, it sounds like two kids made some loose plans of a hypothetical future mass shooting. You want to prosecute the parents for conspiracy to commit murder. Do you have any idea how crazy that makes you sound?

To flesh out my comment even more... If my 16 year old gets a DUI, do I lose my license? If my 16 year old rapes a cheerleader, do I go to jail? Do I go onto the sex offender list for raping an underage girl?

You have some screwed up beliefs.

I work at a school specifically for kids with behavioral issues. Roughly 70% of these kids are being raised by people other than their parents (grandparents, aunts, uncles, foster care) because their parents are not capable of raising them. How can you raise a child when you can't take care of your self? The ones who do live with their parents/parent usually aren't coming from the best situations. Am I saying always bame the parent? No. I know great parents can raise kids who do wrong. But I have seen many situations where yes, I DO blame the parent. They have not done their job as a parent in teaching their child right from wrong. And that IS a parents job.

Gotta go with rjw007 on this one.

Yes some kids are psychopaths....but not nearly as many that are just not being raised properly or supported by their parents.

Not every case is the same, but you can't deny that there is a serious lack of parenting going on these days.

Z,

If your 16 year old is getting DUIs and raping teen agers, you probably need to go to jail for child abuse. You got some serious issues of your own you are no doubt projecting onto your kid.

You all seem to be under the impression that criminal behavior is a result of bad parenting. DUIs and date rape are some of the most common severe crimes kids commit. People with perfectly normal upbringings do these things.

You're wrong.

I second both of those comments!!!!

Yep, you're wrong. These 2 will be sent away to learn a trade like burglary, or fraud. Then after they know how to commit real crime they will be let out to prey on the rest of us.

And at least one of them was busy programming himself for the future with his Columbine video. Hopefully they will get the help they need.

LOL.. It looks like they were planning on using flammables and propane tanks but hey never let a chance to gun bash go to waste.

Tracy, as a far left liberal, I do not want to take your guns away. I'm only asking that you and others keep them out of the hands of the children. Seems to be an almost impossible task, but, we as adults, should be able to find a way.

Tracy, also I doubt if the lefy handouters are any more in abundance than the righty handouters. (Is handouters a word? oh, well. I like the word).

My guns, like nearly every gun owners weapons are never in the hands of children unless we are right there with them. You over exaggerate a very rare event.

My God, Tracy...are you capable of discussing any topic at all without whining about someone taking your weapons? Are those the first words out of your mouth when you wake up? STFU about someone coming to take your weapons. Your paranoia and your unfounded belief that you so important in this world that anyone has the time or makes the effort to think about you and your freaking weapons is getting past annoying.

CDC data would indicate that it not so rare, nationwide, as you might think, Ted. In your home it may be rare. Nationwide, it is far too frequent.

DOCJT, you may have a reasonable understanding of firearms and why not to take them away, unfortunately most people on your side of the topic do not.

And it is also unfortunate that many on the other side of the topic do not have a reasonable understanding of gun safety around children. Perhaps that is the issue that we need to focus on before we start proposing that everyone go armed.

I personally have no problem with gun ownership. I do, however, have a problem with irresponsible gun ownership and lack of safety with firearms in the home.

What lack of safety? Imagine much?

an estimated (and rather low estimation in my opinon) is that 1.7 million children live in homes with loaded and unlocked guns.

Less than 50 ACCIDENTS and about 30 of them are fatalities with children (under 18) happen every year for a rate of .003% accidents and .001765% for fatalities. Children are not over 18! you'll see stats that say 500 but that includes 18 to 24!! That is insanity since you can buy your own firearm legally at 18 in any state!

You're quoting facts that don't exist oh and even if you buy that nonsense of 18 to 24 that's .03% not exactly a big problem.

I know I know even just one but you'll ignore children falling into buckets of water or pools or cars or that die from fires and insert nearly every other accidental cause of death. heck 30 kids die from drinking poison. How about you first make it so that everyone has to have a lock and key for draino first since its just as likely to kill them as an unlocked firearm.

Well, let's see...the most recent incident that comes to mind is guy whose 3 year old shot him in the face with a loaded unsecured weapon that 3 year old should never have had access to. Then there was the 4 year old that shot his 3 year old playmate and killed him after getting ahold of a loaded and unsecured weapon in the home. Those are just the first two that come to mind that would illustrate a lack of firearm safety around children.

The most recent year for which complete numbers are available is 2006. In that year, 3184 children were killed by firearms. Seventy three of those were considered to be "accidental"; 176 were suicides in which the gun used was obtained from the family home.

But let's use your number of 50 accidental shootings of children a year. Surely you are not suggesting that is acceptable. That 50 children loosing their lives is a small price to pay just so you don't have to be subjected to enforced regulations regarding your choice to have a firearm in your home? Surely to God that is not what you are implying.

If you want to count 18 to 24 year olds as children, they are not. and never have been considered children in any state. But hey don't let facts get in the way. Only 50 kids (under 18) were harmed from gun fire and only 30 died. But hey again.. Don't let the facts cloud your hate of guns or spewing of incomplete and non-intellectually honest stats.

And what i am implying is that the world is not bubble wrapped, that instead of worrying about 30 kids dying from poisining that you are focusing on guns because you hate guns not because they kill kids.

Oh yeah.. Um only 11,000 people were kiiled with firearms all year. but 3134 where from adults 18 to 24 labeled as "youths" or "kids" by morons.

I look forward to your next onslaught of misleading "facts" and demonizing of firearms because of your personal beliefs instead of logic. For now I'm off to bed though. I'll refesh this page in the morning to see what new nonsense you will come up with instead of being intellectually honest about the problem. Why don't we just call the facts the facts and deal with realities instead of emotionally pulling data from 18 to 24 year olds and claimng them to be "Kids" . They are not kids. They could never be tried as juveniles in any juristicition for any crime no matter how minor. Yet people, for purposes of political BS, will call them "kids". It is nonsense at its extreme.

This is like calling adults in college "kids", nonsense.

The numbers I used go from birth to age 18. No 19 year old to 24 year olds included in those numbers. Your point is moot.

ONLY 50 shot and ONLY 30 killed? Well, then, I guess you are saying that 20 kids maimed, and 30 loosing their lives because of gun accidents with firearms in the home is perfectly acceptable. How many kids have to die before you find the number unacceptable, Ted? 100, 200, 1000? Because I have already given you the number of kids 18 and younger that have lost their lives due to firearms in 2006. Seventy three "accidental" deaths, and 176 suicides from firearms obtained from their home. Is that number deaths of kids acceptable to you?

BTW, where are you getting your numbers? I referenced mine. You keep using different numbers, but haven't cited your source. But hey, I'll work with your numbers. Thirty dead kids. Unnacceptable.

And that doesn't include the accidents where the child shot an adult, like in the most recent incident I cited. Is it acceptable that a 3 year old shot and killed their father because their father was not responsible in keeping a loaded weapon away from a 3 year old toddler? No matter that the kid will be traumatized for the rest of their life. No biggie. It was just another one of those annoying accidents.

Ted, I'm just curious as to the percentage of children who get a hold of a gun who don't kill someone. Oh yea, there aren't any statistics on those types of incidents.

Face facts, while you may have a grip on making sure your children don't get a hold of any of your firearms, this is America and that doesn't happen throughout this country. When I was a child, two times friends of mine brought guns from their homes to show me. We never shot anyone but they were able to get their hands on them none the less. One of these friends had a father who had no problem with his child handling his guns at any time, even when he wasn't around. Would you consider him a good father?

Some parents either don't care or are too caught up in their own lives to pay attention to everything their children do. As far as your comparison of guns to Drano, fires, pools, or car accidents, it's not the same. Guns are by design made to kill, fires, Drano, pools, and cars are not. Yes, they can be used to kill, but how many children have you heard about who have crashed cars, drowned someone, spiked drinks with Drano or purposely set fires to kill others?

Also, quoting statistics are only as good as the those who compile those statistics. Just as I disapprove of those who believe gun control is the answer, I also disapprove of those who believe that because they are responsible gun owners, that there either is not a problem or that it's minor. Whether you care to believe it or not, if a child is determined enough to get a hold of a gun (or anything else for that matter), they will, even with the best of protections. In addition, while your child may not touch your guns, how can you be absolutely certain they're not able to touch a gun in another home?

With all that said, I also understand strict gun control is not the answer. When I was a child, I was educated by my parents, teachers, and other responsible neighborhood parents about gun safety. In this day and age, responsible parents don't want responsible neighbors or teachers teaching gun control, parents want to reserve that responsibility for themselves. That is a mistake. The more gun safety is taught at a young age, the more likely the child will respect firearms.

Cases where a child or young person gets a hold of a gun or other weapon to purposely kill others in a school, theater, etc., that will never fully be stopped. As populations expand, it becomes more likely to happen. A child or any adult bent on revenge (and that's really what it boils down to) will do whatever it takes to take out that revenge. Guns are more readily available for those over 18 and is a tool they can use to do the job faster than other tools. Guns are also more accurate in that you could start a fire to kill people, but unless you've completely barricated the building your burning, they could escape. Ramming someone in a car, you've only got one opportunity, once the car is wrecked, you've been stopped. Poisoning requires blind cooperation of others..you cannot make people take it. They have to believe it is safe to take and even then, some may not for whatever reason. Even a bomb isn't a surefire way. What if the bomb doesn't go off or is not powerful enough to do damage? Most weapons of choice have too many variables. Guns not so much. Yes, they could misfire but if someone brought more than one (which is usually the case in gun mass murders), they simply use another one.

So again, what is the answer? Gun control won't stop it. Allowing people to carry in public won't stop it. Even education won't stop it. Because we live in a free society, this is the type of chance you take living in America.

One final comment. I usually find those against gun control are also pro-life on the abortion issue. I've never quite understood the logic of someone who believes it's acceptable to kill someone with a gun but not kill a fetus. Even if using that gun to protect yourself against a crime where your life is threatened, it's still killing another. I've heard the argument that God will absolve you of the sin if done in self-defense or war (or the person believes that because of their religion), but for me, I consider it an excuse of convenience to justify the reasoning for the killing. I've never heard of stealing, coveting your neighbor's posessions, not honoring the Sabbath, or comitting adultry in self-defense and those are 4 of the other 10 commandments. Do we obey commandments only when convenient?

Tracy:

I do not want to take your guns away but think there must be controls. To answer your question, in a word, nothing!!

Dan:

I lived on military bases most of my adult life, and a kid would never get his hands on a gun, period. Of course, his parents would not readily be able to get their hand on it either. All personal weapons are stored at the base armory and must be checked out by the owner. By the way, no one has broken into the bases and killed someone's cat, or raped someone's wife and daughters, and life as we know it did not end. Everyone used their guns for whatever purpose they bought it for, but they were controlled!!!!

I have cited my sources you have just refused to look them up. Its as easy as going to the DOJ website and no you havnet givin me any source that has a under 18 fatality rate.

Page 3 of 6. Its the entire USDOJ report from 2008! and this page indicates the ENTIRE and complete amount of victims for a 18 year spand!

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf

Approximately a third (34%) of murder victims and almost half

(49%) of the off enders were under age 25. For both victims and

off enders, the rate per 100,000 peaked in the 18 to 24 year-old

age group at 17.1 victims per 100,000 and 29.3 off enders per

100,000.

You'll see the 18 to 24 year old group is actually the highest offending group, why include them in the under 18 year old age bracket as kids? Hum maybe because it makes for a nice anti-gun story.

page 4 of 36 has the real story. Go ahead an look and then spew your nonsense some more. Rates for under14.. Hum <can be shown on a graph at basically 0% oh and then look again at 14 to 17..Its a nice anitgun story on the right but when you look at the numbers is 9.7 per 100,000 or .0095% hum... I guess my DOJ and FBi stats are completely boogus..

As for all the kids that take agun to school and go on killig rampages well that doesn't happen.. school homocides average less than 12 times a year and in 2008 (a bump year) there were 17 homocides and many... Drum roll.. were not shootings..

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2011/figures/figure_01_2.asp

I've given my sources, govenment sources.

You were nice enough to state 3,100 kids were killed, implying that was by firearm, but they were not. Including sucides in that number is bogus, that's not being killed. Then you fail to note the real number (1562) of homicides for under 18 http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2011/figures/figure_01_2.asp

and that out of them only 8.1% were killed via a firearm, thats 12 to 13! children under 18! in 2008, a bump year. page 5 of 36 http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf while nearly 60% were arson or poison!

that that number includes infacide and parental neglect and adults killing children, how intellectually dishonest when you're talking about guns in the hands of children.

there are about 50 gun related injuries to persons under 18 every year of them about 30 are fatalities. Why is my number bigger than the 13 to 13 homicides? Because i'm intellectually honest and stick to the actuall topic on hand. We were talking about children getting firearms and causing injuries/death. Most of these cases are not considered homicides! So I was honest and gave you the 50/30 stats while you gave me 3,100 deaths most of which (nearly 92%) were NOT from a firearm. But hey you want to paint a picture that suits your political agenda.

you associated it with firearms but many were not by firearms (only 63% were) hum 17 killed in 2008 in schools for (10). Oh my god what an epidemic! Oh but who cares about facts, all these facts must have been published by an NRA lover or something, we all know how the FBI is in the back pocket of the NRA [rollseyes]

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf of all the homicides of children (this includes adult on children) only

I have cited my sources you have just refused to look them up. Its as easy as going to the DOJ website and no you havnet givin me any source that has a under 18 fatality rate.

Page 3 of 6. Its the entire USDOJ report from 2008! and this page indicates the ENTIRE and complete amount of victims for a 18 year spand!

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf

Approximately a third (34%) of murder victims and almost half

(49%) of the off enders were under age 25. For both victims and

off enders, the rate per 100,000 peaked in the 18 to 24 year-old

age group at 17.1 victims per 100,000 and 29.3 off enders per

100,000.

You'll see the 18 to 24 year old group is actually the highest offending group, why include them in the under 18 year old age bracket as kids? Hum maybe because it makes for a nice anti-gun story.

page 4 of 36 has the real story. Go ahead an look and then spew your nonsense some more. Rates for under14.. Hum <can be shown on a graph at basically 0% oh and then look again at 14 to 17..Its a nice anitgun story on the right but when you look at the numbers is 9.7 per 100,000 or .0095% hum... I guess my DOJ and FBi stats are completely boogus..

As for all the kids that take agun to school and go on killig rampages well that doesn't happen.. school homocides average less than 12 times a year and in 2008 (a bump year) there were 17 homocides and many... Drum roll.. were not shootings..

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2011/figures/figure_01_2.asp

I've given my sources, govenment sources.

You were nice enough to state 3,100 kids were killed, implying that was by firearm, but they were not. Including sucides in that number is bogus, that's not being killed. Then you fail to note the real number (1562) of homicides for under 18 http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2011/figures/figure_01_2.asp

and that out of them only 8.1% were killed via a firearm, thats 12 to 13! children under 18! in 2008, a bump year. page 5 of 36 http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf while nearly 60% were arson or poison!

that that number includes infacide and parental neglect and adults killing children, how intellectually dishonest when you're talking about guns in the hands of children.

there are about 50 gun related injuries to persons under 18 every year of them about 30 are fatalities. Why is my number bigger than the 13homicides? Because i'm intellectually honest and stick to the actuall topic on hand. We were talking about children getting firearms and causing injuries/death. Most of these cases are not considered homicides! So I was honest and gave you the 50/30 stats while you gave me 3,100 deaths most of which (nearly 92%) were NOT from a firearm. But hey you want to paint a picture that suits your political agenda.

you associated it with firearms but many were not by firearms (only 63% were) hum 17 killed in 2008 in schools for (10). Oh my god what an epidemic! Oh but who cares about facts, all these facts must have been published by an NRA lover or something, we all know how the FBI is in the back pocket of the NRA [rollseyes]

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf of all the homicides of children (this includes adult on children) only 8.1% were by firearm (about 13 in 2008!)

I continue to look forward to your nonsense replies and dishonest facts instead of unerstanding that the number is 50 accidents and 30 fatalities (with children holding the firearm). That's it that's all . I've proved it Ive given you CDC numbers, census numbers, FBI and DOj numbers. You cite this 3100 number that includes adualts killing children and suicides (most of which still had no firearm involved oiver 60% were from fire and poisioning) but hey keep up the good work of manipulating numbers and facts to promote your anti-gun hate speech.

As for children having access to firearms. So what? Some kids have a .22 rifle in their bedrooms. I had access when i was a child and I didn't go on killing sprees and guess what neither did any of my neighbors! Just because your parents didn't raise you with repect of a firearm and to the point where you could be trusted doesn't mean the rest of the paranting world has failed. Granted 50 to 60 accidents a year is horrible and 30 dead is terrible but considering there something around 80 million kids out there (i didn't check that stat, i'm guessing) I'm thinking that even the most anti-gun nut job can be intellectually honest enough to understand that numbe is statisticaly insignificant and if anthing proves that having a gun in the home doesn't mean your son is going to grab it and start blasting away the neighborhood and schools or even kill himself with it when his girlfriend dumps him.

Population expansion doesn't mean anything is more likely to happen. Probability doesn't go up because population goes up just incidences go up. Just so ya know.

Wow. A total of 4 posts and so many words, yet nothing of substance.

I have already stated, Ted, the numbers I used do not include the 19-24 year old age group. You continually attempting to bring this age group into the discussion is truly nothing more than a straw man argument, much the same as the fallacious comparisons of guns to cars, pools, and Drano.

Additionally, I agreed to use your figures, even though they are a gross misrepresentation. And again, you fail to answer the question, "The death of 30 kids from firearms every year is acceptable to you?" How many deaths would it take for the number to become unnacceptable: 100, 200, 1000?

So because we have 80 million kids in the U.S., we can afford to loose 30 -50 a year due to firearm accidents? No biggie. Until it's your kid that is shot and killed, or your kid that commits suicide with your gun, or your kid that shoots you in the face because you left a loaded and unsecured weapon where a toddler could get ahold of it.

If you were truly a responsible gun owner, you would be willing to discuss these issues, and work toward a solution. Your concern is not responsibility and safety. Don't pretend that it is.

Including suicides in that number is not bogus, and if you had any degree of comprehension regarding pre-teen and teen aged suicide, you would already grasp that. But I really have run out of patience with attempting to discuss the issues with someone who chooses to remain willfully ignorant and shallow all to support their right to have an arsenal in their home if they so choose. Such a shallow thinker, and a narrow minded perspective.

Oh, and just a little hint for you in your future research. If you are looking for crime figures, go to the DOJ. If you, however are looking for accidental death and severe injury numbers, go to the CDC. Two different sets of data kept by two different agencies with 2 different purposes. That is why your numbers are lower than mine. They eliminate a good number of the actual deaths and injuries because there was no crime committed. Death still occurred, though.

DOC,

I think it is very funny for you to chastise Tracy because he responded to a post that brought the topic of guns to the conversation. Every single time your are even near a the word "Gun" you seem to start salivating as you type your leftist policies and prejudices against the entire gambit if topics involving firearms.

I personally believe the story was intended to sensationalize the liberal hysteria of fearmongering among the persons who have never been to a firing range or possibly never stepped out of CANADA, or New york where socialism is the rule.

The 15 year old boys were fantasizing with no actual preparations. I worked as a social worker and see this type of behavior many times where the imaginations of teen agers overcome the realities of life.You all are so ready to give them counseling where people with degrees are much more messed up than the shooter in Colorado. Or even sent to a juvie hall where they are raped and taught the realities of criminal behavior so that as they become adults, they can be counted on the rolls of the Penal system or welfare endowed druggies.

My grandson was once expelled from the elementary school for playing imaginary cops and robbers, where he pointed his finger and said, "Bang".

I find it interesting that the crazy shootings of today NEVER happened before the liberals were allowed into the minds of our children. I grew up shooting my best friends with toy guns daily and to this day have not committed any crimes or murdered anyone.

Someone please explain to me why the reverse of the desired results are the damnation of our youth? The Experts have "pussified" our society to the point that imaginary violence is the place to escape to because the Social standards have created the need to go underground.The result is the "Gangasta" image becomes fashionable.

DOC, I was wondering if you have all of your post written down so that you just need to cut and paste?

If you would put away your rhetoric for a few moments and think about the REAL reason for the gun violence is the liberal criminal laws relating to violence and weapons.

I have been shooting since I was 8 years old and to this day have not killed anyone, committed a crime, sold a gun to a person that I was not allowed to, or done any of the senseless things you always list in your fearmongering post.

Am I just that brilliant or are you just blind? LOL with all due respect.

"Oh Canada, Oh Canada Oh Yes We Can:)"

Lazarus

you must be blind. because the figures I gave are from..

the doj, the cdc and the doe

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf

You are just blinded by your hate for guns.

The CDC has about 600 deaths by guns for children and then those that are related to a child getting a firearm is 20 the number in accidents are 60 to 50.

again you refuse to look at the links and the cited sources because they prove you're wrong you just have no clue how to read data.

Kids have access to a lot these days and teenage boys are notorious about keeping things to themselves.

One plot lead to another????

And they still get away with things you know nothing about.

Good on you for caring and all, but there is a difference between "nosy" and "invasion of privacy". Going overoard is just as bad as not caring at all.

I do not go overboard. we go thru rooms to check for clean drawers and closets - not diaries/jornals or letters. don't judge me - but I know every inch of my home and there are no weapons here, that's all I am saying. I am FB friends w/ my kids and know their friends - my kids don't think I invade their privacy and appreciate that I care. so thanks for your 2 cents.

i would like to know what these kids did? what are they being charged with? so they get arrested and their names printed but we cant get what they were arrested for and charged with. i get that the accusation was threats against public safety but thats pretty vague without context, especially online. if one was to hear me talking online while playing GTAIV you might think that i was killing cops and committing mass murder and all sorts of other 'crimes' but in context i am playing a game and talking with people online.

these kids might be guilty but from this story you would never know. no reason to print the kids names without giving us more details because if it turns out these kids are innocent, the damage is already done. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!! does anyone remember that?

Swagganaut be a troll. No one could possibly be that stupid and still use a computer.

Swaggagarnaut, Are you possibly the son/kin of Jimmy Swaggart the creepy Evangelist?

Guess Swagger would have been happier if they got to carry out that plot. Or maybe would have still complained about that unlawful and immoral arrest of the two sweet little innocent murderers.

Swagganuat your right. The story is incomplete. What gets released will probably depend on the DA. I too want to know what they said that constitutes a " serious crime". But I'm glad if they have issues it came to someones attention. People are damned for not knowing enough about someone and damned if they do. We get mad at kids and say " you should have said something even if you thought they weren't going to do it." What's the point of all that if we don't believe them when they try to warn us?

I wonder how you teach them responsibility???? That is what they will need to sustain their lives, when you are not there to watch their every move and fuss at them all the time.?

Want to take that chance? Just ignore it? Wait for it to happen, and then say, you're right/wrong?

Since Columbine and w/all the other stuff that has happened, the authoritites take this sht a lot more seriously.

umbraobscura

"As someone from Temecula, this doesn't really surprise me. The Inland Empire is a miserable place to be and the high school kids here are retarded. It amazes me how some people actually like it out here."

Would that be your kids, too? Try not to be such an ass...calling kids retarded? I'm not surprised you don't like it there...everyone around you must hate you, too.

I asked for more info. Nothing about "wait and see". Quite a leap, there.

I'd prefer we respect rights and not just throw people in jail for having a conversation but hey, that's crazy talk.

flintlock-4771495

Want to take that chance? Just ignore it? Wait for it to happen, and then say, you're right/wrong?

in this country we have whats called innocent until proven guilty. you cant just arrest people because you 'think' they might do something wrong, you need proof. its people like you who would like us all to be controlled 'for the better good.' lots of movies that deal with just that mind-set.

Does anyone remember Mitt Romney's comment after the Aurora tragedy. He would prefer to find a way to stop it before it happens. Me too, but we do not need a "Minority Report". lol Because what is inside ones head does not mean it is going to be manifested forward.

well either right or left, they both would love a "minority report" type society to oppress us.

@bluepanther

You probably think I'm older than I actually am. I'm in college and went to high school there not too long ago (as in the past couple of years.....I don't have any kids). My peers were pretty dumb. And I have many good friends, thus your assumption about my friends not liking me is also incorrect. So, from very recent first hand experience, I can indeed say that high school kids in the Inland Empire are not very bright. Add that to the fact that the IE is a very conservative region of California and there is absolutely nothing to do short of going to San Diego or Los Angeles, then you surely have a pretty bad place.

Geez, guys. Anyone ever consider there is an investigation going on and maybe it isn't the right time to release more information? Or that it isn't anyone's business, actually, to have all those details that will be presented in court? they wouldn't have arrested them if they didn't have some kind of proof, and unless you are the judge or chief of police you have no right to hear it all at this point. Just because they didn't share it with YOU doesn't meant it doesn't exist.

The police arrest people all the time for nothing. Plus, if what they have is so top secret, why say anything????

well keep thanking God and praying........

From what I have read, I'm not so sure there is a problem????

Are you purposely being obtuse, or are you simply that lacking in comprehension and good sense?

Deb, you say "this crap has got to stop" so what do you suggest be done to stop it? Increase the level of punishment? I doubt that would work because the rates of recitvism in penal systems around the country are getting worse every year. So what does "nip it in the bud" mean to you?

Mental health is an issue here....they need help first, to be studied and counseled to hopefully find out why they feel like this. Hopefully it will help prevent others from doing this.

first we need to know if any of this is accurate. this story lacks huge details and all its going on is online assumptions.

if i was talking online and i said "hey ima go kill some cops". would you think i was going to actually kill some cops? what if i was playing a game were i could kill cops. would you then think i was going to actually kill real cops? context is huge online, you cant see the person talking to you and so you cannot see the proper context of what they might be saying. you assume everything someone says as 'online bravado,' just talk. until the evidence says otherwise you do not arrest people for perceived actions resulting from online chat.

Swag, and yes, if you told me you were going to go kill some cops and we weren't playing a game where you do that I wouldn't know if you were joking or not. I would try to find out more, and if I did think there was a decent chance you meant it I sure would call law enforcement. How about people not say stupid things like that?

I was in line to fly a few years ago and some idiot in front of us (college age male) make some comment to his friend about the bomb in his suitcase...hope they don't find that bomb I put in there. Guess what? His butt got escorted out of line, the luggage all had to be searched, and that idiot won't be flying anywhere for a long time. You say stupid things and you get consequences, and if you make threats...joke or not...you have consequences.

So would you rather have laughed with him, let him fly and had the plane blow up? Guess so. These kids said something that triggered this to start, and perhaps if they weren't saying whatever it was they might be home annoying their parents right now instead of in serious trouble. You are a perfect example of the ones they refer to when they say after a mass murder or a suicide, "Didn't he give any clues he might do that? Did he tell anyone? Didn't anyone notice something was wrong?"

And Swag, you'd be the one wishing you had spoken up so people didn't die. Well, I hope so, anyway.

@Tracy Warner 766:

Convicted BEFORE being tried? Due process, much?

How much jail time do you think 15 year old boys get for making "serious threats"? That was the charge they were booked into Juvenal hall on. That's JUVENAL HALL. As in MINOR CHILD.

Hey Miss Deb:

Put out that cigarette, take a deep breath and have another cup of coffee!!!! When someone have been found guilty of Columbine type violence???? The investigation has not concluded and you have these kids guilty of a Columbine type massacre? Wow????

It takes a whole village to raise a child. As technology grew the world shrank and the village got a whole lot bigger and brought all of it's problems along. Is it more surprising that this happened or that it doesn't happen more often?

Not surprising at all. It's been very alarming to me to see the societal changes that have been occuring over the past 20-25 years and I'm sure you are right in citing the growing influence tecnology has played in shaping people's values and attitudes toward others, for better or worse.

wutdatshazam, go play in your sandbox and leave the rest of us alone as we attempt to have an adult conversation about a very serious problem facing America.

There a major problem with your nonsense.

Youth violence is lower today than the late 60's but hey lets make up crap so you can spew your anti-gun anti-american anti-liberty nonsense.

The very premise of your argument is wrong. Since youth violence is lower since violent Xbox games, movies, and gun prevalence has gone up (actually the latest estimate is about 1.7 guns per person now) then how can you make any reasonable argument even correlating let alone making a causal association among the items listed? Maybe instead of making a huge statement that is so blatantly false you can research for 2 minutes before you open your mouth.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/stats_at-a_glance/hr_trends.html

Ted, do you believe everything you read? I was a teenager in the 60's, and, believe me, we were nothing like today's generation.

Um. Okay so left gun hating groups are making up stats? Really? The CDC is covering up gun violence and youth violence? Really? Is that what your stooping to now. Saying that kids are going on huge shooting sprees and the FBI are not reporting them? Really? The trends are from the FBI and CDC. They aren't being made up and I can tell yo without a doubt that the late 60's and early 70's were far far more violent and the 20's were WAY WAY worse than anytime since. the 90's saw a spike and the argument was because of the introduction of crack and PCP usage. Reality, soak it in.

Jack, you are absolutely correct. This is a societal problem, and kids are getting very disturbing messages regarding the acceptabilty of violence from a very early age. They are also exposed to far too much violence in video games before their brain has developed to the degree that they can effectively moderate what they are seeing with reality.

If a few of the posters on here have children, you are getting a very real example of the very type of parent that contributes to violence in children.

Except the facts show that being exposed to violent video games or programming has ZERO to do with increases in violent crime in children, zero, nada. It has actually gone down since the PS3 was introduced dramatically, nearly cut in half!

Stop it Ted...you're going to cause a pinhead explosion by using facts

Actually, Ted, a correlation has been demonstrated, and a positive one at that.

Boy you like being wrong don't you? a negative correlation has been demonstrated but don't let the facts get in the way of over dramatisiing for your own political beliefs.. the violent crime rate amongst the 0 to 24 year old age group has dropped to half since the PS3 was released! The crime rate for under 18 has dropped by something like 33% but those stats aren't readily available and have to be guessed at.

http://ideas.time.com/2011/12/07/video-games-dont-make-kids-violent/

Quite simply, the research just hasn’t panned out. For one thing, even while
video game sales have skyrocketed, youth violence plummeted to its lowest levels
in 40 years according to government
statistics. Secondly, it has been increasingly recognized that much of the
early research on VVG linking them to increased aggression was problematic: most
studies used outcome measures that had nothing to do with real-life aggression
and failed to control carefully for other important variables, such as family
violence, mental health issues or even gender in many studies (boys both play
more VVG and are more aggressive.) This was something the U.S. Supreme Court
recognized when, after considering California’s attempt to ban the sale of VVG
to minors in Brown v. EMA, it stated on June
27, 2011, “These studies have been rejected by every court to consider them, and
with good reason.”

Read more: http://ideas.time.com/2011/12/07/video-games-dont-make-kids-violent/#ixzz23zXpkQji

Never let things like FACTS get in the way of promoting your nonsense political agenda.

Here are all the nice line graphs so you can follow the NEGATIVE correlation between video games and youth violence.

proof of the negative correlation between when violent video games came out (PS3 release) and youth violence that are near all time lows. Stop making stuff up.

http://www.gamerevolution.com/features/violence_and_videogames

A negative correlation, Ted? LOL...do you even understand what a negative correlation is? Because it doesn't mean what you think it means, obviously.

The term you are looking for is "no correlation". A negative correlation is simply directional, and does not mean that there is no relationship. In fact, it means just the opposite.

And I am not wrong at all. There are many studies going back several years that indicate a positive correlation between viewing violent acts via media (or example) and subsequent violent behaviors.

Sorry, but your anecdote does not prove correlation in any direction. It is not a correlation study. It is anecdote, and anecdote quite often assumes correlation where none actually exists.

And, thanks for the link to the newspaper, but I prefer to get my information from the actual studies themselves that provide me with methodolgical data.

You referred me to a gaming site? LMAO! For unbiased statistical data on violence in video games and violent behavior, you referred me to a gaming site? Really? Really? Are you really silly enough to think that is valid, or are you that uninformed?

Oh, and just because a court rejects an argument as a defense does not mean that the situation does not exist. It simply means it cannot be used as a defense to mitigate responsibility for behavior. Silly!

I just showed you numbers indicated when the PS2 was released and the negative correlation, which means (im a statistician) that when one thing goes up the other goes down. That's exactly what has happened. The statistical data on that site is from the FBI and DOJ links I have already given you to prove their validity. It is a correlation study. The number of video game consoles and games sold (up) vs. youth violence (down) yet you'll still toe your BS.. There is no causation between exposure to video games and violent tenancies, I gave you a link to a peer review white paper that shows this data perfectly.

You should agree with the ~50 number because it is correct. The suicide number shows mostly death by other means than firearms. I've given you Department of education, FBI, DOJ, CDC data showing the truth but yet you refuse to acknowledge it because it doesn't fit with your distorted warped reality.

As I pointed out more kids die and are murdered with poison than any other method. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 times more often for a death toll of 400+! as for suicide it is still near 27% of all deaths. Why are you then advocating for locking up guns first before making it illegal to have poison not locked up? I know why because it doesn't fit your politics and illogical fears. you want to control others so much that reason goes out the window.

Go ahead and take you ball and go home, great mature way to argue when you've lost the argument on real facts.

The fact that you want to argue that video games increase violent crime when every piece of data out there shows a dramatic, nearly a 50% drop since the late 90's, is amazing. You think that's a positive correlation? This is a perfect example of someone that is so against something, so much a control freak, that they will lie cheat and throw temper tantrums when they are face to face with the truth.

flint, I don't mean to cut you down but would say that 'Believers' have no corner on civility. As a predominantly Christian nation how do you explain away the fact that our country is one of the most violent nations on the face of the Earth?

flint, I don't mean to cut you down but would say that 'Believers' have no corner on civility. As a predominantly Christian nation how do you explain away the fact that our country is one of the most violent nations on the face of the Earth?

um...I don't remember praying in school..I turned out great...so did my classmates. Please don't bring God into this. He has nothing to do with this.

Um no you're wrong as well because violence in schools are at all time lows so god not being in the school had nothing to do with anything unless your saying that when god was in schools the rate of violence was higher.

You've been duped into believing this nonsense when today kids are even safer than ten, twenty, thirty, forty and even nearly fifty years ago.

Rates of school-associated student homicides decreased between 1992 and 2006.

Even the year of colombine was a near all time low for homicides and colombine was a spike event.

Schools Are Safer Than They Were a Decade Ago

Every year the federal government issues what it calls a snapshot of school violence. This survey, called Indicators of School Crime and Safety, is a compilation of data from several government agencies, including the FBI, the Center for Disease Control and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The survey looks at victimization, bullying, student perceptions of school safety and many other topics.

The latest of these snapshots was released in 2006, using data from 2003 through 2006. This study, and others, indicate that:

• Statistically, school is the safest place for children to be.
• Students are more likely to be victims of violence outside of school than inside.
• School-related violence is on the decline.

http://www.greatschools.org/improvement/volunteering/99-stopping-school-violence-the-latest-trends.gs

This study specifically says "school related violence is on the decline," which is probably true since schools now have metal detectors and uniformed police officers patrolling the halls. That in itself speaks volumns. The kids themselves are not less violent. They are more so. It's just that the school environment is more restrictive, more prison-like than it used to be, so they take their violence out on the streets and the internet. You have drawn an erroneous assumption from this study.

No you have refused to read the links given or take 30 seconds to do any research at all! Go look at the BOj website

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/viortrdtab.cfm

http://kotaku.com/188297/youth-violence-at-all+time-low

There is no epidemic of youth violence in America.

The whole concept is a lie... Kids are not killing each other more frequently than they used to. In fact, it turns out the opposite is true.

Check out that ugly graph on the right... violent crime is at the lowest it has been in a good thirty years. For effect, I've also marked the release of the Playstation console, the first Grand Theft Auto game, the PS2 console, and the infamous GTA 3. Wow, look at those surges in violence!

[HINT THEY WENT WAY DOWN!]

Believe it or not, I got that graph... from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Statistics. All I added was the video game timeline...

1973
47.7

2009
16.9

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/viortrdtab.cfm

Gun crime.... Down http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/guncrime.cfm

Violent crime..

WAY Down HALF OF WHAT IW WAS IN 1973

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/viort.cfm

gun crime rate NEARLY half of 1973

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/guncrimetab.cfm

the list goes on, do a google next time before you start spreading these outrageous lies.

ALL YOUTH VIOLENCE CDC AND even including up to 24 years of age!!

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/stats_at-a_glance/hr_trends.html

God has not been ordered out of the schools. Never has been, never will. Children are perfectly free to bring their Godly beliefs to school with them.

The problem is, the parents who claim "Christian" belief systems with one side of their mouth, and spout hate and violence with the other side. Stop setting such poor examples for your children. You want your children to live Godly lives, start showing them how instead of being such hypocrits in you own homes.

DOCJT..

Agreed.

Tracy, would it be possible for you to actually post without calling names? It doesn't even matter if I would agree with you or not, but starting your posts with nasty names says more about you than anyone you are trying to vilify.

This thinking is the cause of too many problems. God was never ordered into schools so no need to order him out. God don't take to orders too well! Now, God is always in schools as he is everywhere, all the time! The one domain that God gave to man was his free will (mind/brain). Yet, too many refuse to use this miracle, and rather, wait on God to fix everything. If I was God, I would rip my phone lines from the wall, put in ear plugs, an eye patch, and say, "have a nice day."

God was ordered out of our schools?

When did that happen?

If God didn't leave right away, would they give Him detention?

Don't make the schools responsible for teaching the morality you should be teaching at home as a parent. No wonder our eduction falls so far behind that of other industrialized nations. Our teachers don't have time to focus on academics, because they are so busy trying to make up for what parents are not doing at home.

our education isn't behind other nations at all. We just have some stupid people raising some stupid kids.

Well, we certainly do have some stupid people raising some stupid kids. You get no argument from me there. But still, our educational levels fall far below many other industrialized nations.

With stupid people raiseing stupid kids that doesn't mean our education system is failed it means our parents have failed.

Wrong. Homicide rates peak in the 1920's was there no god then? And they peaked again in 1967! and then again in the mid 1990's, the rates are now near all time lows for ALL crime.

Interesting. Please cite the studies. I know that in my lifetime there have been some drastic changes in my personal space . No one locked their doors, even at night, and I never heard of a home invasion until I was an adult. Now I have experienced one. As a child, I could play outside without fear of molestation, go trick-or-treating without fear of poison or razor blades. In the area where I live, drugs are epidemic, along with the accompanying crime. When I see someong trying to say things are no worse or even better violence-wise than they used to be, I think someone is seeing what he wants to believe rather than the truth, and that he is probably too young to know the difference. One thing I have found out about the internet, whatever position you take on an issue, you can find a study to validate your beliefs.

THe doj, the FBI, historical papers, you name it. the 10's to 20's were way higher murder rates. WAY HIGHER!

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/viortrdtab.cfm

Peer reviewed paper written by Grant Duwe1Minnesota Department of Corrections

http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v6n1/manuscripts/duwe.pdf

God has never been removed from the schools, lunatic. And if you are any example of "Godly behavior and teachings" your children are getting a very disturbed message at your hands. Stop blaming the schools for your hypocrisy and inability to properly parent your own children. Schools are for teaching academics. You are responsible for teaching moral and ethical behavior to the children you bring into this world.

DocJT, My thoughts exactly. Schools are not there to teach religion, thats the job of the family & the church. Not reciting the Lord's prayer changed nothing & is not the cause of any violence or crime. I'm 72 & have seen many kids from religious families do some terrible things while those not involved in orinized religion havr raised some really good kids.

Yes, tired, I get tired of the lunacy of believing that if kids sit and pray at school they will magically be perfect children. God wasn't taken out of schools, so you can move on from your push to make public schools your church. Teach your kids the way to live and if you need all day at school for that you're missing out on what parenting means.

No God, Little God, or Much God has nothing to do with it. God teaches us to take care of the poor, but we vilify them! God tells us to visit and tend to the sick, yet, we yell "let them die! You get my drift???? Learning come through repetition and best learning through visual, So, if you are not constantly reminding your children of the good things, and showing them the good things, they will do bad things--no matter how much God you throw their way!!!! I'll bet a $ to every doughnut on it!!!! While you are at it, show them all people are revered by "GOD" and all deserve our respect, and that it is okay for us to look different. God did not create these problems we are having and we should not expect him to rescue us. We need to just look within and take actions!!!!

Note to kids that like to hatch plans like this. Don't be an idiot and talk about it to anyone. Even online. That makes it so you get caught. Use the internet at a coffe shop or public library, make all new accounts and never check them from home. Then if you want to stupidly talk about your sick fantasies, the authorities will hit a dead end.

These idiots make the same mistakes every time.

Yes because this is always a problem. When I was 15 I was shoplifting and after I got caught (second time around) I stopped. No need to throw my life away by ripping of some store.

How nice of you to leave out the entire 1920's to promote god.. Facts stick when others know them and you don't

http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v6n1/manuscripts/duwe.pdf

ABSTRACT Over the past twenty years, claimsmakers have asserted that the mid-1960s marked the beginning of an unprecedented and ever-growing mass murder wave in the United States. Recent research has shown, however, that mass murder was just as common during the 1920s and 30s as it has been since the mid-1960s.

Most of the mass murders in the 20's and 30's were due to organized crime and a glorification of the criminal element, much as there is today. The "roaring twenties" were also a more Godless time in this country, where people were more into self-gratification than responsibility and family. A depression and two world wars brought some sanity back, until the 60's when everyone seemed to forget. "The only thing man learns from history is that man learns nothing from history."

So god disappeared for a decade in the 20's too, wait, no there was still prayer is school then too! Don't you think that most of the crime done today is from gangs and drug dealing organized crime rings? Of course. It has nothing to do with prayer in school, or lack there of and right now we're at a near all time low since we have recorded crimes. WHY IS THAT? Hum...

So now this is because of gays and God not being in schools? This is the liberals' fault? Where is the personal responsibility here? We don't know the situation here much at all, but now you've made up why it happened and added a post relating to gays and liberals?

I know some wonderful religious people and some horrible ones, and I know some who aren't religious and wonderful, and some who aren't. Nice way to lump everyone together and come out with nothing.

Just more evidence of those who refuse to take responsibility for their own lack of parenting their kids. Always someone else's fault. Why do some of the conservatives here seem to be eaten up with entitlement and lack of responsibility for themselves?

Thomas, Oh, Thomas:

Much revisionist history???? Kennedy was (democrat) too! Nixon escalated the war before he ended it, with much American dissentions! There are more KIAs in Afghanistan under Obama, because there are more troops there. Remember that little detour taken (with more than 6000 KIAs) to carry out that illegal demonstration???? What have we got to show for that???? If you are going to do history, do it fairly and truthfully, or you are only doing partisan politicting!!!!