Planning commission votes to defer decision on Menards for one month

I love Lawrence uniqueness as much as the next guy, personally I really do not want us to turn into Olathe west. I don't really care one way or another if we get a Menards, I think HD is sufficient for a town of this size but recognize that Menards would create some competition, I don't think it would matter too much though as I doubt the local stores can create their own sales to compete. I think the thing that frustrates people on these comments though isn't the lack of retail approval or a desire to get a bunch of chains in here, rather I think the frustration is that the city will fall all over itself to approve unnecessary new apartment complexes (even in areas zoned for single family homes) but won't approve a retail development with a gun to its head.

April 23, 2013 at 9:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Opponents of drug testing for welfare benefits see it as hassling the poor; Brownback says it will help

The problem with this program isn't the merits of catching a few drug users and not subsidizing their drug use, I think most agree with that. The problem is stigmatizing an entire group of people as drug users purely because they're unemployed. The vast majority of people on public assistance are not drug users (which is why this is a waste of money/time). The perception is that these people are lazy losers, but that theory has yet to be proven as true. If you want to "help" the people on welfare the government should do more to spur the economy by putting more money into the hands of those who are poor, either through mandatory living wages or direct public investment to create jobs.

April 22, 2013 at 8:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Opponents of drug testing for welfare benefits see it as hassling the poor; Brownback says it will help

So you're arguing that if you create something then you have more rights than those who do not. Further, even welfare recipients contribute to the common good. They purchase goods and services and pay taxes on what they buy, feeding right back into the system. Also, the social safety net is designed to help people when they're down and trying to get back on their feet. It is not full of drug using losers (as bore out by the other State's who have tried this) as much as conservatives like to believe. IF you want everyone who gets a benefit to "produce goods/services" then perhaps our government could creates jobs through government spending. If you think that welfare is a waste of money and would rather tie it to something valuable in your eyes then the government should STOP cutting spending and instead put the money toward infrastructure improvement etc.

April 22, 2013 at 8:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Roberts, Moran vote against expanded background checks in gun sales

read the original post by Liberty, Optimist. in reference to someone who argued that the second amendment right ends when it endangers their children and their right to live, Liberty said "Those rights do not exist in the constitution. At best you have a right to due process before being executed." So yes Liberty is arguing that because the right not to be killed is not in the constitution, the right to own a gun trumps it.

April 18, 2013 at 4:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Roberts, Moran vote against expanded background checks in gun sales

Are you seriously arguing that the right to own a gun trumps the right not to be murdered because the constitution doesn't expressly say individuals have a right to not be murdered?

April 18, 2013 at 3:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Roberts, Moran vote against expanded background checks in gun sales

That's a great way to distract from what was really going on. Newtown served as a catalyst that got us to discuss gun violence in our country. Remember it wasn't only Newtown pushing this it was Gabby Gifford and Mayor's Against Illegal Guns (both organizations that are not Newtown related). The point is to stop "all" gun deaths not just mass shootings. That's why this law was multifaceted and involved more than just background checks (assault weapons ban and high capacity magazines).

April 18, 2013 at 2:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Roberts, Moran vote against expanded background checks in gun sales

what is the government check coming from sir. If you're referring to money from the ACA the individual doesn't get the money it goes directly to the insurer, so that makes no sense. If you're referring to welfare or unemployment benefits there is no restriction on how individuals use that income.

April 18, 2013 at 2:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Roberts, Moran vote against expanded background checks in gun sales

The people don't have to be arrested for the background check to work. If the individual doesn't get the gun then the check did its job. It's just like when an individual is carded when buying alcohol or tobacco, they don't have to be arrested for the system to work.

April 18, 2013 at 2:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Roberts, Moran vote against expanded background checks in gun sales

That's not what I'm saying Fred. What I'm saying is that the national gun registry would take some sort of legislative act by congress or regulatory act by the federal government. That is the time to fight the registry. Using the registry as a fear tactic to garner opposition to a law that specifically outlaws the very registry being used to scare people is NOT the time to have the debate.

Yes, the government is capable of lying. But, using the fact that the government lies to kill a reasonable bill (despite that the registry has never existed in the history of our country even after the Brady Bill was passed) is NOT a justifiable reason to kill the bill.

April 18, 2013 at 2:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Roberts, Moran vote against expanded background checks in gun sales

KSManimal that IS not the point. The mass shootings are the catalyst that this country needs to think about gun regulations. In this case it was Newtown. A majority of gun deaths each year are NOT through mass shootings, they're through suicides. It's sad that it takes the images of 20 children to get us to discuss gun control but unfortunately it does. Regulation that keeps guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminals will reduce gun violence in this country. There are studies that show that for suicides for instance, if you put up even a single roadblock to the suicide the individual will not go through with it. Ergo, if an individual cannot obtain a gun because they have a history of mental illness they may not kill themselves. And before you say well they'd just find another way, that's actually not true, often if they can't get their hands on a gun they don't end up killing themselves.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/fir...

April 18, 2013 at 2:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )