WATCH: Beto Reiterates Anti-Gunner's Talking Points On AR-15s (And It's Absolutely False)

Beth Baumann, an Associate Editor for Townhall, On Mar 17, 2019, wrote "WATCH: Beto Reiterates Anti-Gunner's Talking Points On AR-15s (And It's absolutely false)"about the anti-gun speech given by Presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke. The author mainly focused on Beto’s thought about the AR-15. As Beto explained the AR-15 is mainly manufactured for military purposes. He also added how harmful it is and why it should not be used or sold for civilians to use it anymore. however, the blogger looks like, she is not buying Beto’s anti-gun explanation for his supporters. So, she labeled his thought as a false narrative. The blogger brings a twitter post to support her idea. The twitter post was a picture trying to disprove the anti-gunners exaggeration of the damage of the assault rifles.

As we can clearly understand the ideas given above, both sides have a strong reason to support or go against it. As there are “good” gun owners who need free gun ownership rights, there are also people who have a fear of the increase of violence regarding less gun control. So, the government has to come up with a compromising law. Considering the importance of guns for self-protection, hunting etc., it is understandable to let peoples own a gun. But, to make sure that those guns are used only in the right place by the right person, it is important to make a good background check before letting everyone have it. In addition to this, it is also very important to train new owners on how to use the gun properly, and individuals should not allow using military level weapons.  And any military level weapons should be banned.

What Trump Got Wrong, and Right, on North Korea

On February 28 2019 The New York Times published an article "What Trump Got Wrong, and Right, on North Korea" by The Editorial Board. Since the breaking news regarding President Trump and Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s leader, abruptly ended their second summit meeting on Thursday after talks collapsed there are a lot of opinions around. I happened to read this Editorial Board opinion on Feb 28, 2019, and want to share the opinion and my critique about it as well.

The editorial board starts by saying “The summit meeting in Hanoi revealed the hazards of his personal approach to diplomacy. There’s no sugarcoating the failure of President Trump’s second summit meeting with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un.” I believe this "summit" was nothing more than a show-up, but the consequences of a stalemate are dangerous. North Korea's nuclear program development continues, and our negotiating power is more weakened.

President Trump told reporters “Sometimes you have to walk,” in Hanoi as two days of talks intended to put curbs on North Korea’s nuclear program came to an end. The editorial board suggests that it was a self-possessed, sensible reaction from a president who seemed to be in a rush for any deal that would give him at least the appearance of a foreign policy victory. However, I find it unbelievable that U.S. and North Korean officials had not come to at least a modest agreement prior to the failed Trump-Kim summit. This indicates, President Trump clearly is not negotiating from a position of strength and the failure in Hanoi demonstrates again the administration’s unwillingness or inability to prepare adequately for high-stakes meetings. I think, they set up this summit just because he badly wanted foreign policy to win, instead he fells.

The Editorial Board also discussed “the outcome in Hanoi, Vietnam, demonstrated the hazards of the personal diplomacy with authoritarian leaders that has become Mr. Trump’s stock in trade. From Vladimir Putin’s protestations of innocence on election meddling to Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s denial that he had the journalist Jamal Khashoggi murdered, and this time he said Mr. Kim denied having known about the condition of Otto Warmbier, the American college student who died of brain damage after he was released from a North Korean prison in 2017, “and I will take him at his word.” Mr. Trump has shown that he trusts despots over his own government. I also strongly agree with this idea, and it is really hurting to hear these from the President.

Finally, the Editorial Board asks what will happen next and remark that there is a good sign the President discussed the outcome in a calm and measured tone. The Secretary of State also expressed hope that the two sides will get back to work out with this complex problem. That suggests a willingness on the American side, at least, to continue working-level negotiations, which are the only way to achieve an agreement on complex issues.