Inexpensive yacht rentals for ‘all’

Posted on March 29, 2016 by Roxanne Yu

By ROXANNE YU

The countdown for summer has already commenced and we all know what that entails — spending more money for vacation destinations.

During this time of year travel plans are certainly one of the most discussed topics. It’s timely that The New York Times has just released an article in its travel section that promotes the idea of yacht vacations.

The article suggests that yachts could be affordable as long as one knows where to look, indicating that week-long charters are inexpensive and will only cost $5,000 or less.

There are a couple of yacht rental sites that the article links readers to, all of which could render to be useful to those interested.

Although the article was able to touch upon a relevant topic, it has certain limitations and flaws, starting with the title “Yacht Vacations: Not Just for the Rich.”

The title is misleading, as it infers that yacht vacations could well be afforded by every other person who belongs to lower hierarchical class of society. A price of $5,000 may well be affordable for the upper middle class of society, but this does not necessarily constitute the lower middle class, as well as those below this category.

The article, although informative, could have been more interesting if there was more content added to it. The purpose of the article is to inform the public about low yacht rental prices, placed a significant amount of attention towards boat charters, however, left out ideas on what one can possibly do in a yacht for an entire week.

The article could have been a lot more engaging if the writer included more information about yacht vacations, as the article was supposed to cater to those who have never really had the chance to experience and afford such luxury.

It could have also been more insightful if there were a number of sources who shared their own stories on how their yacht vacation turned out to be. This would have been able to help those who are seriously considering a yacht vacation.

As journalists, we often like to keep our published works straightforward in order to merit the full attention of the reader. It’s extremely hard to measure when an article is underdeveloped or not, but to our benefit it is better to report the entire story that includes additional facts rather than publish one that is half baked.

Opening relations with Cuba

Posted on March 25, 2016 by Robyn Shapiro

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

After President Obama traveled to Cuba a couple of days ago, the U.S. continued, as a country, to open relations with Cuba. It was the first presidential visit to Cuba in more than 90 years.

The “Rachel Maddow Show” did a 45 minute segment on how each Democratic president since John Kennedy (and including JFK) has tried to reopen relations with Cuba, but none have been successful until President Obama.

While many people see this as a positive progress into the future, many Cuban Americans would disagree.

Even though Marco Rubio dropped out of the campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, I felt that his opinion on Cuban relations had the most accurate representation on why Cuban Americans are against opening relations with Cuba.

“The policy (Obama’s) is based on the illusion that more commerce and access to money and goods will translate into political freedom for the Cuban people. This will not work: The Cuban people are not free because the regime — just as it does with every aspect of life — manipulates and controls to its own advantage all currency that flows into the island. More economic engagement with the U.S. means that the regime’s grip on power will be strengthened for decades to come, dashing the Cuban people’s hopes for freedom and democracy,” Rubio stated on his Web site.

The Miami area is a very unique part of the United States where the story of people escaping the Cuban regime is a common one.

In an interview I did with civil engineer Jose Vega in Coral Gables, he stated similar opinions to Rubio after explaining to me that his family fled Cuba when he was 13 years old. His parents decided to leave Cuba so that he could have a better life. He started in the United States very poor and built his own business, and he prides himself on being a successful representation of the American Dream. He knew that in Cuba he never would have had that opportunity.

While the rest of the United States cannot relate to his story and the story of many Cuban Americans, it is important to take into consideration the first-hand experience they’ve had while we make progress in international relations in the future.

While I have found the news media covers both sides of this opinion, the minority side (Cuban-American side), is less understood and therefore should have equal attention to the pro-Cuba relations side.

Palestinian teacher wins $1 million

Posted on March 18, 2016 by Victoria De Cardenas

By VICTORIA DE CARDENAS

An elementary teacher has won a $1 million prize recognizing the “outstanding contribution” she has made to her profession.

Hanan Al Hroub, from Bethlehem in the West Bank, was awarded the Global Teacher Prize at a ceremony in Dubai Sunday.

Hroub became a teacher after her husband and her children were shot on the way home from school. “It transformed my children’s behaviors, personalities and academics,” she says in a video broadcast on CNN. “I felt that I was alone in getting my children through this. No teachers had helped us get my children back on track.”

Hroub and her family decided to take matters into her own hand. They created games amongst themselves and invited the neighborhood children to play.

Over time, the children’s behavior and grades began to improve. She took those skills and began teaching to help children reject violence.

“I tell all the teachers, whether they are Palestinian or around the world: ‘Our job is humane, its goals are noble,” says Hroub. “We must teach our children that our only weapon is knowledge and education.”

Pope Francis announced the award to Hroub via video conference. “I would like to congratulate the teacher Hanan Al Hroub for winning this prestigious prize due to the importance that she gave to the role of play in a child’s education,” Francis said.

It is moments like this that the media should focus in on every detail. A story like this could boost the overall moral in the country and across the globe. Instead the media likes to focus presidential hopefuls who say very disturbing things and agitate the public.

In order for the country and the world to move forward and accept one another of different faiths, race and beliefs, we need stories like this. Stories of people that invest in children and the betterment of the world around us.

I saw this article earlier this week and it only came up once in my newsfeed, but I saw plenty of stories on the negatives of life. I understand that the news gives people what they want but how about giving the people what they need? An uplifting story like this one shouldn’t be so hard to locate on a news website or hear it in front of a television.

News should consider giving an outlet to uplifting news.

The truth about ISIS and women

Posted on March 18, 2016 by Robyn Shapiro

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

ISIS is one of the most horrifying and inhumane terrorist groups that has come to power in the Middle East.

Recently, The New York Times published an article stating that ISIS captures unaffiliated women and keeps them as their sex slaves.

In addition to this, the terrorists force the women to take birth control in order to satisfy commandments of the Islamic law so that they can continually rape them. The Times states “It is a particularly modern solution to a medieval injunction: According to an obscure ruling in Islamic law cited by the Islamic State, a man must ensure that the woman he enslaves is free of child before having intercourse with her.”

Women would be circulated through different houses for different men to have their way with them. Men would often give these slaves as a gift, so once they were satisfied they would give the women to their friends for their pleasure.

Before each encounter, women would take the birth control in front of the man before they would proceed. The men sometimes got so hysterical about the potential of a woman being pregnant they would take them to a hospital for a pregnancy test. If the woman was found to be pregnant they would physically abuse them until they consented to abort.
In the interviews The New York Times had with women who escaped, the women stated that despite the situation they were happy that they were forced to take birth control.

Although pregnancy would have been their only relief to the constant abuse, the women stated “No one wants to carry the child of their enemy.”

More than 700 individuals have been reported as rape victims of ISIS terrorists, but each woman has been raped an uncountable amount of times.

Although articles like this are indescribably sad, heavy and difficult to read, it is important that the American audience has some exposure.

The media does a good job covering how we are battle ISIS, but we are often deprived of the details that encompass the horror of their acts.

While too many articles like this one would make readers cynical of the media, I do believe it is essential to have some understanding of the actions of this terrorist group in order for us to truly comprehend why we need to help those affected by them.

It is the media’s job to inform the public of worldly affairs, and while much of the world is filled with horror, we should be conscious of these actions so that we as a people can have awareness, empathy, and a passion to fulfill justice.

Humans of NY founder criticizes Trump

Posted on March 16, 2016 by Kate Hovan

By KATIE HOVAN

Brandon Stanton, a photojournalist and blogger, is the brain behind the increasingly popular blog and book “Humans of New York” (HONY), which chronicles stories of ordinary passersby in New York City.

Stanton will post daily photos of the people he meets on the street along with a direct quote or short story, giving people a glimpse into the lives of ordinary people.

His work isn’t limited to New York City, though.

Stanton also occasionally photographs and posts stories from people he meets on international excursions, including people in places like the Middle East.

On Monday, however, the HONY founder posted something a little different online.

In an open editorial to Donald Trump, Stanton stated: “I realize now that there is no correct time to oppose violence and prejudice. The time is always now.”

Stanton continued, “Because along with millions of Americans, I’ve come to realize that opposing you is no longer a political decision. It is a moral one.”

Stanton also referenced some of Trump’s most appalling comments regarding race and refugees. Stanton, referring to himself as a journalist whom has “conducted extensive interviews” with people from around the world, added: “I can confirm — the hateful one is you.”

While some may argue the HONY founder isn’t your typical journalist, he still claims to adhere to journalism’s ethical code, stating in the editorial that he refrains from being too “political.”

In this case, as unusual as it may seem, I commend him for taking a moment from his work to be “political.”

This year’s presidential race seems to have turned uncharacteristically hostile, and it’s alarming to think that the future of our country has become a form of twisted entertainment.

But the so-called entertainment reaches a point where it isn’t funny anymore. The future of the United States shouldn’t be taken lightly.

In my honest opinion, Stanton deserves the utmost praise for his editorial. Without powerful, well-known voices to speak out on behalf of the violent and unethical situation that is unfolding, what will the United States become?

After all, it’s hypocritical to promote anti-bullying in schools if it’s happening on the federal level every day.

Trump denies offering to pay legal fees

Posted on March 16, 2016 by Melissa Cabral

By MELISSA CABRAL

Donald Trump backpedalled his promise to pay the legal fees of his supporters who are turning violent at his rallies when the subject was brought up on his interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Tuesday.

“By paying those fees, wouldn’t you be rewarding and encouraging violence?” asked host George Stephanopoulous.

At one of his recent rallies in February, Trump controversially told his supporters who became violent towards protesters: “Knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. OK? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise.”

After the “Good Morning America” host continued to press him on the matter, Trump denied ever saying those words.

“No, no I didn’t say that. I haven’t looked at it yet, and nobody’s asked me to pay for fees, and somebody asked me a question and I haven’t even seen it, so I never said I was going to pay for fees,” the Republican presidential candidate said.

As recently as this past Sunday, Trump was still promising to monetarily take care of his supporters when it came to legal fees regarding violence.

In his interview on “Meet the Press,” which aired Sunday, Trump said that he had his staff “look into” covering the legal fees of one supporter in particular who punched a protester at his rally held in North Carolina last Wednesday.

“I’ve actually instructed my people to look into it, yes,” Trump replied when asked about paying the fees.

Tuesday’s interview had Trump conveniently retracting and even denying his previous statements. When asked if telling his supporters that he would cover their legal fees if they became violent towards his protesters would be encouraging negative behavior he seemed to have a change of heart.

“Well maybe so, and maybe that’s why I wouldn’t do it. I don’t condone violence at all, and you know I looked and I watched and I’m going to make a decision.”

This statement comes after intense criticism of his campaign after several of his rallies became chaotic and violent last week.

‘Spotlight’ illuminates a sensitive topic

Posted on March 3, 2016 by Robyn Shapiro

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

In response to the film “Spotlight” winning the Best Picture Academy Award last Sunday, news coverage has rekindled its fire toward the issue of sexual assault in the Catholic Church.

“Spotlight” tells the story of an original investigation conducted by the Boston Globe that began in 2002, when reporters in the Globe’s investigative team started to analyze cases of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church.

Recently CBS News released information that a Grand Jury report had found two bishops had hidden more than 100 sexual assault cases by more than 50 priests and religious leaders in the past 40 years. Evidence was found for these cases in a secretive dioceses archive.

News media are the only way a population will be informed about what goes in the world around them. While I appreciated the quality of storytelling that “Spotlight” did in order for the public to know about the issue, I am sad that it took almost 14 years after the original investigation in order for people to recognize its relevance again.

Does it really take a Hollywood picture to emphasize the weight of corruptness inside of this religious organization, or in any organization?

If that truly is the case, then the news media should emphasize other channels in order to get across crucial messages. A compelling story like this one could not have been told in a more emotional, factual and enlightening way.

Film is a medium of communication that has not been unlocked to its full potential and is one of the few art forms and media channels that engages an audience through almost every sense.

While issues like this one and undoubtedly others go unnoticed, it is our job as the media to not only inform the public, but also truly convey the importance and pertinence of current issues in whatever media channel that is most effective.

Tim Cook fights back in ABC interview

Posted on February 25, 2016 by Melissa Cabral

By MELISSA CABRAL

Apple CEO Tim Cook said Wednesday he’s prepared to take the controversial FBI vs. Apple dispute to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Cook said that it would be “bad for America” if Apple were to accept the FBI’s request and court order of unlocking an encrypted iPhone previously owned by one of the San Bernardino shooters.

Officials have said that they only need Apple’s assistance in unlocking certain security features on the iPhone which would help release information regarding the murders. Cook fought back saying that if they complied with the request it would put Apple’s customers in danger of having their information exposed, as iPhones would become more susceptible to hacking.

“Some things are hard and some things are right, and some things are both. This is one of those things,” Cook said. “I think the safety of the public is incredibly important.”

Cook showed sympathy for the families of the victims of the shooting and said that Apple sent out some of their own engineers to provide technical support to further the case in any way they can without creating the “backdoor” software the FBI is requesting.

Cook added, “If we knew a way to do this that would not expose hundreds of millions of other people to issues, we would obviously do it. But this is not about one phone, this is about the future.”

Although a meeting is not confirmed, Cook said that if he had to, he would make his case directly to President Obama in order to avoid going through with the court’s request.

Hundreds of millions of iPhones would be at risk in the process of creating a software to unlock the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone and Cook stated that he will go to great lengths to protect the privacy of the company’s customers.

FBI Director James Comey argued that Apple simply has to unlock only one phone but Cook disagreed.

“If a court can ask us to write this piece of software, think about what else they could ask us to write,” Cook said. “Maybe it’s an operating system for surveillance. Maybe it’s the ability for law enforcement to turn on the camera. I mean I don’t know where this stops.”

Apple has until Friday to respond to the judge’s order.

‘Devil’s drug’ needs media attention

Posted on February 25, 2016 by Grace Bernard

By GRACE BERNARD

Since 2014, the designer drug flakka has silently terrorized the streets of South Florida. With the number of users rising throughout the U.S., flakka needs national media attention now more than ever.

Flakka is a highly addictive synthetic drug. According to drugsabuse.gov, side effects include paranoia, hyperstimulation, and hallucinations that can lead to “violent aggression and self-injury. The drug has been linked to deaths by suicide and heart attack.”

Other side effects include super-human strength, a likely result of an adrenaline rush. Also users are known to strip naked due to a massive rise in body temperatures associated with the drugs consumption.

Flakka’s biggest threat is that the U.S. population is under the assumption that the drug’s usage is contained to South Florida, where it is by far the most concentrated. Because of this, news media coverage has been vastly limited to local South Florida news organizations such as The Miami Herald, The Palm Beach Post, and The Sun Sentinel.

Flakka usage is spreading quickly and the lack of media coverage leaves many people in danger, particularly young people in poor urban neighborhoods. Flakka is particularly accessible to this group because it’s so cheap. Without any education from the national press, thousands of people are in danger. According to Forbes.com, flakka usage has spread to Chicago, Texas, Kentucky and Ohio. The drug is only growing more popular, especially with the lack of education nationwide.

One example of the grave disparities in flakka’s news media coverage compared to other drugs was in early 2014 when the DEA officially categorized it as a Schedule 1 drug. Despite the importance of this, the news did not make any major national headlines.

Less traditional forms of media have been more prominent in the coverage of the drug. YouTube has a variety of videos about flakka. Some videos were educational, while the majority were recordings of people high on the drug. These videos had thousands of views, with some of them even having millions. The population clearly has an interest in flakka and is seeking out more information.

The need for public education about flakka is evident. While flakka is not a nationwide issue yet, it is already well on its way. The duty is on the news media to provide coverage about this silent killer because they’re the best equipped to handle the potential crisis.

The bathroom bill problem

Posted on February 19, 2016 by Robyn Shapiro

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

The Senate of South Dakota has recently voted to approve a “bathroom bill.” The bathroom bill states that students would have to use the bathroom based on their “chromosomes and autonomy” at birth, rather than what they identify with now. This bill not only attacks the LGBT community, but also completely discriminates against transgender students.

State representative Fred Deutsch, who was in favor of the bill, stated this is necessary in order to protect the “bodily privacy rights” of “biologic boys and girls” and that if transgender students were uncomfortable with this, they could use private accommodations. He refused to do a follow-up interview with Time magazine on this statement.

Time provided a first-hand example of how this law could effect transgender students when they interviewed Rebecca Dodds, the mother of a transgender boy who had recently graduated high school in South Dakota.

Her son stated that the idea of using the girl’s rest room was so uncomfortable for him, he would avoid using the bathroom the entire day. Because of this, he contracted multiple urine infections and had other health-related issues throughout his high school career.

The identity struggle for transgender students is a difficult enough issue that having a law to further isolate them from normalcy would only contribute to their existing insecurities. While conservative America considers the sensitivity of the standardized “norm”, liberal America considers the sensitivity of all.

I believe Time magazine did an excellent job providing a non-biased, yet informative, opinion on this current issue. They provided opinions from both the pro and con sides, while further examining how this law would affect transgender people and the LGBT community outside of the school system.

While much of our American population is socially conservation, our younger generations are growing be more and more liberal. The media needs to continue to report these issues with sensitivity and compassion as our society progresses into acceptance.

Grammys bring race issues onto stage

Posted on February 17, 2016 by Breana Ross

By BREANA ROSS

Under the dim lights of the stage, multiple black figures immersed from the darkness in a straight line. As the figures became closer to center stage, it became apparent that they were shackled, chained together. Even closer, it became visible that the figures were dressed as inmates. They continued to walk in unison, closer and closer to full visibility, until the leader of the line reached the microphone that waited in the center of the stage. The head of the line was award-winning rapper Kendrick Lamar and he was about to deliver a controversial, political performance on one of the largest music stages in the world: the Grammys.

Lamar, a popular African American rapper known for his songs about the struggles within the black community, delivered a powerful performance with many messages about racial injustice, African American heritage, and self-hatred intertwined. The performance began with Lamar and his background dancers in chains and dressed as prisoners while he rapped his song “The Blacker the Berry” which discusses oppression issues surrounding the Trayvon Martin case. Lamar rapped, “You hate me, don’t you? You hate my people. Your plan is to terminate my culture,” among other lyrics.

As the mood of the performance shifts, Lamar and his dancers drop their chains and begin to dance. Lamar then walks on to another set on stage with African dancers around a fire and begins to sing, “We gon’ be alright,” a lyric form another one of his popular songs. He ends the performance alone on stage, once again, rapping about racial injustice and oppression towards African Americans as an image of the continent of Africa with the word “Compton” written inside appears on a screen behind him.

Any time an artist, politician, or anyone for that matter, has the courage to speak on an issue of race on such a large stage, it is a hit or miss with the news media. Some times the individual receives enormous praise in the media while other times there is major backlash. In this case, Kendrick Lamar’s Performance was raved about within the media.

USA Today and the Los Angeles Times called Lamar’s performance “the only one that mattered.” CNN and many other popular entertainment news outlets covered his performance, all in a positive light. However, this positive reaction by the news media is drastically different from the reactions spurred by Beyonce’s Super Bowl performance.

Beyonce’s Super Bowl performance was also an attempt to bring light to the struggles of African Americans, but using a different approach. Beyonce’s back-up dancers all sported “Black Panther” attire as their outfits for the performance. Although a subtle message, this sent the media into a frenzy over Beyonce’s intentions. Some claimed the bold move was racist and anti-police.

Others connected the Black Panther reference to support for the Black Live Matter movement. Regardless, the media picks and chooses which racial messages to accept and which to reject. When one decides to discuss the “race issue” on a world stage, there is a risk attached, one that can impact the favorability of the artist in the eyes of the media.

The Pacific solution: Paradise or prison?

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Grace Bernard

By GRACE BERNARD

This week, thousands of Americans were given a very personal look into controversial Australian detention centers that have kept hundreds of refuges from gaining asylum.

Hailed by the Australian government as the “Pacific Solution,” the detention centers opened in 2001. Located in Naru and Manus Island in Papa New Guinea, they were created as a response to the increasing number of people seeking asylum in Australia by crossing international waters.

From the beginning, controversy has surrounded the extremely isolated centers. While it is difficult for those held there to speak out, reports of beatings by officers, rape and violence between refuges continue to surface.

The United Nations, Human Rights Watch, and Australian citizens have all condemned the Australian policy due to what can best be called the camp conditions.

According to BuzzFeed News, in 2014 a report from the Australian Senate committee gathered overwhelming accounts of the horrible conditions including dead flies in the food, overflowing toilets, abuse by guards, and detainees suffering heatstroke while waiting for food.

With the influx of refugees becoming a powerful international issue, it’s surprising that both the American news media and public have devoted such little attention to the Australian policy. Little recent information can be found about the detention centers, especially not from major U.S. news outlets.

This comes as both especially surprising and disappointing since, as of Feb. 6, the company operate the centers, Broadspectrum, extended its contract for another year. With another five-year lease, this does not come as a hopeful development to those against the policy.

As debates about what the solution is for handling immigrants and fears of terrorism rise internationally, the detention centers show no signs of closing soon. Hopefully, the American public will identify with the cause before the situation worsens.

Governors refuse Syrian refugees

Posted on November 19, 2015 by Meredith Sloan

By MEREDITH SLOAN

According to ABC News, at least half of the country’s governors are refusing to take in Syrian refugees in their states amid heightened security concerns following last Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris.

ISIS has claimed responsibility for the Paris terrorist attacks, in which 129 people were killed. Since Friday’s attacks, ISIS has threatened to attack Washington, D.C., and New York.

This chilling effect has influenced several United States governors to refuse Syrian refugees. Ultimately the federal government decides on matters of immigration, not the states.

Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas has taken to Twitter to express his opposition to allowing refugees.

This tweet caused a mostly negative reaction from his followers and media consumers alike.

An individual with the twitter handle @jonvox responded to Hutchinson’s tweet saying, “ You are a horrible man and make me embarrassed to be an Arkansan.”

Likewise, Facebook and YouTube have been flooded with political comics and videos that compare the current refugee crisis to World War II.

Those who support the relocation of refugees in the United States have compared the current government opposition specifically to the opposition towards Jewish refugees.

The dissenting opinion of the U.S. governors is less likely to be accepted by media consumers on social media because of the chilling effect of terrorism.

‘Baby Hitler’ goes viral on social media

Posted on November 13, 2015 by Xiao Lyu

By XIAO LYU

Reuters reported on Tuesday that Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said if he had the opportunity to kill Adolf Hitler when the German autocrat was an infant, he would. The White House later tweeted the article featuring his answer with a comment, “Gotta do it.”

In an interview with the Huffington Post series that covers the campaign trail with the candidates running for president, this former Florida governor’s responded “Hell yeah, I would!” to the question: if given the opportunity, would you go back in time to kill baby Adolf Hitler?

“The problem with going back in history and doing that, as we know from the series — what’s the name of the Michael Fox movies? It could have a dangerous effect on everything else. But I’d do it, Hitler,”said Bush.

This odd question was picked via the e-mail address that Bush distributes widely to public audiences, and in fact, it had already become a controversial question when The New York Times Magazine ran a poll over the weekend last month asking readers if they would go back in time and kill baby Hitler. The result showed that 42 percent of respondents said they would, 30 percent said they would not and the left respondents were not sure about it.

The response on social media to Bush’s comments and The New York Times Magazine went viral. Most of them were comical, but it is still a sensitive question involved an adult kill an infant. Therefore, on Wednesday, when Ben Carson was asked the similar question, but there was a slight difference. The question was whether or not he would “abort” a baby Hitler and he responded that he was not in favor of aborting anybody.

In that case, whatever the respond to that question is, it will lead a new roar on the internet.

FAU students support guns on campus

Posted on November 13, 2015 by Charlotte MacKinnon

By CHARLOTTE MACKINNON

I read a brief story on the NBC6 Miami website this morning that spiked a concern that has been resonating with American citizens for a long time, especially this past year. It relates back to the age-old issue of this nation’s gun laws.

Just last month, nine people were killed in a shooting at an Oregon community college. That incident was just one out of many tragic school shootings that have occurred in this country in the past decades, and it brought more attention to an already controversial issue.

This morning, I read that a bill is making its way through Florida state legislature that could legalize the carrying of guns on the campuses of public colleges. It is currently against the law, but the bill recently passed a Senate committee. I was shocked to see that Florida Atlantic University students are actually pushing in support of the bill, especially in the aftermath of the Oregon shooting.

Evidently, the mindset of those who are in support of legalizing the carrying of firearms is aligned with the idea that it will not impact the likelihood of another school shooting. Some students were saying that all the law would do is allow students who already have a concealed carry permit outside of campus to legally carry their guns on campus – and if one were to act violently with their weapons, it would happen regardless of the legality of the situation.

What I don’t understand is why it is necessary to have a firearm on campus in the first place. I do agree that the legality of having a gun on campus wouldn’t alone be a motivating cause for a school shooting – such incidents are completely and utterly senseless, and they occur regardless of what state legislature says.

My concern here can be reduced to one word: access. Having firearms present on a place like a college campus – in classroom buildings, dormitories, or fraternity and sorority houses – adds an immediate element of danger to the environment. We all know how easily things can be stolen or fall into the wrong hands and a college campus is a high-pressure environment. As unfortunate as it is, it’s not rare to see many students at any university struggle with mental health issues or develop violent behavior for whatever reason, and it can never be predicted what any one person is capable of.

Obviously, if a killer is set on shooting students or others on campus for whatever sick reason, they will find a way to make it happen regardless of whether or not guns may already be present on campus. I just think that it is completely unnecessary to approve a law that really has no benefits, yet has the potential to be extremely lethal.

Especially after the shooting in Oregon this year, and the shooting at FSU last year where three were shot, I find it absurd that students are pushing in favor of this law. I try not to be close-minded to anything, but I must say at this point in time I have a very firm position against the possibility of this bill being passed.

An arduous Korea-Japan summit

Posted on November 6, 2015 by Xiao Lyu

By XIAO LYU

South Korea President Park Geun-hye and Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held the first high-level meeting in Seoul on Monday. The meeting was postponed for more than three years because of historical issues and territorial disputes between two nations.

Before this one-and-one-half hours meeting were the months of diplomatic negotiations. However, they produced no breakthrough. South Korean KBS reported that Korea-Japan summit mainly discussed the issue of so-called comfort women — tens of thousands of Korean and other Asian women sent to work at front-line brothels for Japan’s World War II military. Park asked Japan to give a sincerely apologize and compensate the comfort women before they left the world, while Abe claimed that all the problems from Japan’s often brutal colonization of Korea from 1910 to 1945 have been resolved in Treaty on Basic Relations Between Korean and Japan in 1965.

According to the Japanese reports, Abe told Japanese reporters that he agreed to try to find an “early solution” to the subject of comfort women. He said he did not want to “leave an obstacle for the future generations in building” relations with South Korea.

The news has triggered uproar among the social media in Japan and Korean. One of the interesting topics is the summit didn’t prepare a luncheon for Abe, so Abe and the Japanese ambassador went to eat barbecue in Seoul themselves.

Sankei Shimbun reports that, according to the shop, Abe ordered Korean beef tenderloin and spiced pork. The lunch also lasted one and a half hours and Abe finished all of his meal. Many Japanese netizens expressed their dissatisfaction with Park Geun-hye. They criticized Park Geun-hye, saying the leader had no common sense.

The meeting was a chance for both Park and Abe to save face, but both were in an awkward position. It is still unknown if the two countries can possibly reach a final agreement.