The Thursday wrap
The same federal judge who last week threw out Washington, D.C.'s, ban on carrying handguns in public as unconstitutional has given the District of Columbia 90 days to figure out what it wants to do next. That means legal gun owners will continue to see their legally registered weapons restricted to their homes or businesses. Criminals armed with illegal guns, of course, will continue to roam the streets with impunity. ... We're heartened to see that The New York Times has come out in favor of legalizing marijuana. But what took it so long? And The Times calls itself “progressive”? Heck, we've been in favor of full marijuana legalization for years. That said, Pennsylvania remains among the states with full marijuana prohibition. It's time to get with the program. ... The National Park Service is spending more than $140,000 to send 10 college students to Australia for a “climate change journey” in November, reports The Washington Free Beacon. And, by golly, the students even will be expected take notes. Imagine that! And we're sure that in no time at all, some or all of the 10 will show up in the media being quoted as “experts.” ... Speaking of climate clucking, Western Pennsylvania broke records this week for summer cold. “What was that, honey? Why, yes, of course, I'll throw another log on the fire, baby — all that global warming is making it cold outside.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ‘Canary in a coal mine’: The SSDI dilemma
- Voter ID: A case reaffirmed
- Confidentiality & carnage: Something has to give
- Work’s the thing
- Saturday essay: Anatomy of a backache
- A school choice victory: Follow the child
- Mon-Yough Tuesday takes
- Orphan sinkhole
- Alle-Kiski Tuesday takes
- ‘No man, no problem’
- Kittanning Council conundrum: Why disband authority?