The Four Terrible Things That Are Destroying Boys in Our Culture

. . .Let’s imagine the world the average 13-year-old boy inhabits. He has long since been exposed to hardcore pornography, and probably watches it regularly. Then puberty hits. His hormones are going haywire. His brain is hardwiring itself to focus obsessively on sex. He cannot really help it. He is now fertile, even as the girls his age, for the most part, are not. He feels the biological impulse to go out and find a sexual partner, though he does not understand this urge and his conception of human sexuality has been perverted and confused by the porn habit he developed in sixth grade . . .

Even the boys who have dads may not have male role models. Very often, despite the father’s physical presence, the mother is still the spiritual leader of the household. There are plenty of fathers who stick around but then refuse to take part in their children’s moral formation. They are warm bodies taking up space, and perhaps bringing home a paycheck, but they neither lead their families nor provide a worthwhile example to their sons . . .

There is a reason why girls outperform boys in school. Girls are not smarter, on average, but they have an easier time because the classroom is set up to reward the calm and organized demeanor more natural to them. Boys are more rambunctious; they have more physical energy; they are less able to sit still and less able to focus attentively on one dull task for a prolonged period of time. The typical classroom environment is torture for a boy. It penalizes him for being himself. It penalizes him for being a boy . . .

You might think we’ve already done enough to these boys. We’ve made our point. We’ve shoved sex in their face, deprived them of role models, and forced them into an education system that treats their personality as a disease. But we are not satisfied. Finally, in case any have survived the gauntlet, we attempt to bury them in self-loathing.

Femininity is attacked in our culture as well, but not nearly so explicitly or directly. Nobody would ever call femininity itself “toxic” or “fragile.” Nobody talks about female “privilege,” even though, as I have demonstrated, females enjoy many unique privileges. Nobody would label all women “dangerous” or “potential monsters to be feared.” These are the special denigrations reserved only for manhood. (Read more from “The Four Terrible Things That Are Destroying Boys in Our Culture” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Murder, Rape and Suicide: How an Obama Era ‘Diversity’ Directive Ushered Injustice Into Our Public Schools

When a policy intended to create racial equality treats students differently based on the color of their skin and buries serious wrongdoing in the name of diversity, real victimhood is ripe for the making and injustice is bound to flourish.

An Obama-era diversity-themed education directive has been doing just that, according to educators, anti-school violence advocates, and guardians of student victims. Whistle-blowers have uncovered the ushering in of seemingly avoidable rapes, sexual assaults, suicides, murders, and vicious bullying within the halls of our public schools due to a threatening federal guidance issued in 2014.

Education Week explains that the civil rights guidance, which was jointly issued by the Departments of Education and Justice, “put schools on notice that they may be found in violation of federal civil rights laws” or denied federal grants “if they enforce intentially discriminatory rules or if their policies lead to disproportionately higher rates of discipline for students in one racial group, even if those policies were written without discriminatory intent.” . . .

Nicole Landers, a pediatric nurse, mother of six, and advocate against school violence, told The Daily Wire that her fiftth grade daughter Tama shared her story of being sexually assaulted in school to Secretary DeVos at the meeting. Landers’ daughter was the only student victim in attendance; other victims were represented by their guardians . . .

Landers succinctly concluded, “However these guidelines were intended, we can’t speak to; the outcome of these guidelines is that all the children are getting hurt,” she explained. “The offending students are not getting identified, assessed and getting appropriate intervention; the victimized students are getting repeatedly victimized; the educators are living in fear of trying to do anything disciplinary in their classrooms for fear of being labeled discriminatory in their actions; the principals are terrified of the central office, so they’re suppressing the data and putting pressure on the teachers to do the same; and the states are worried about the loss of grant funds and CVR investiagtions.” (Read more from “Murder, Rape and Suicide: How an Obama Era ‘Diversity’ Directive Ushered Injustice Into Our Public Schools” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

5 Compelling Reasons Why The YouTube Shooting Has Disappeared From Headlines

Breaking news alerts announcing reports of a shooting at YouTube’s headquarters quickly faded from the spotlight and out of the news cycle—and there are a number of imperative reasons why the rampage initiated by a woman who injured three people and then killed herself has not been used to push the mainstream’s media obsession with gun control.

Here are 5 compelling reasons why the YouTube shooting has disappeared from headlines:

1. As a woman, a peaceful vegan, and a PETA advocate, the suspected shooter is the opposite of the typical “mass shooter” profile promoted by the mainstream media.

When the suspected shooter was identified as Nasim Najafi Aghdam—a 39-year-old woman attempting to carry out a mass shooting when the overwhelming majority of mass shooting suspects are typically men in their early 20s, it may have seemed as though she would actually receive more media attention than most.

However, Aghdam does not appear to have been a white supremacist, a crazy conspiracy theorist, or a religious cult member. Instead, she was a vegan YouTube content creator with a long list of bizarre videos and a passion for animal rights. Despite being Iranian-American, which would excite neocons who are hungry for war with Iran, it does not appear that Aghdam had a political motive or was affiliated with any terrorist groups.

2. The shooter reportedly used a handgun, which also deviates from the mainstream narrative that all mass shooters use high-powered rifles.

Aghdam’s weapon of choice was a 9mm Smith & Wesson handgun, which she purchased legally in January. While Bloomberg attempted to blame Smith & Wesson by noting that the company’s AR-15 was the gun used in the Parkland shooting, the fact is that the weapon Aghdam used does not fit the narrative of dangerous firearms pushed by the mainstream media.

To attempt to ban a 9mm handgun would be almost impossible, but to attempt to ban a firearm that has been demonized and referred to as an “assault rifle” used in a number of mass shootings, is something the media has been working towards for years. While it is estimated that more than 8 million Americans own AR-15s, it has not stopped the mainstream media from openly calling for a ban on “assault rifles” and attempting to explain “Why the AR-15 keeps appearing at America’s deadliest mass shootings.”

3. The shooting happened in California—a state that has already enacted some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation.

When a mass shooting occurs, one of the first things the mainstream media and gun control advocates tend to do—after blaming the weapon—is to look at the location where the shooting took place and how that state’s gun laws can be tightened to prevent another attack.

In this case, the shooting happened in San Bruno, California, which already has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States. As a “May Issue” state, California issues concealed handgun permits to individuals at the discretion of the local sheriff, and restrictions can be based on where that permit can be used in the state itself. California also requires all guns to be registered, and it does not honor permits from any other states.

4. The police were warned about the shooting by the suspect’s father in advance, and they did nothing—something the media tends to cover up.

One day before Nasim Aghdam entered YouTube’s headquarters and opened fire on innocent employees, her father contacted police to report that she was missing, and warned that she may be planning an attack on YouTube. Ismail Aghdam said “she was angry” because YouTube “stopped everything” in terms of monetizing her videos, and he warned police that his daughter may be trying to attack YouTube because she “hated” the company.

While police reportedly found Nasim Aghdam sleeping in a car at 2 a.m. on the morning of the shooting, it is not clear why greater surveillance measures were not taken at YouTube’s headquarters, or how long the attack lasted before Aghdam took her own life and police arrived at the scene.

5. The shooter blamed YouTube for censoring and demonetizing her videos—a problem alternative content creators experience on a daily basis that mainstream media tries to pretend doesn’t exist.

As her father noted, Nasim Aghdam was overwhelmingly angry with YouTube for demonetizing her videos and she believed that the platform was intentionally censoring her work. On her website, Aghdam wrote,

There is no free speech in the real world and you will be suppressed for telling the truth that is not supported by the system. Videos of targeted users are filtered and merely relegated so that people can hardly see their videos.

While most content creators who have had their channels demonetized by the giant platform would never dream of going to its headquarters and attacking innocent employees, the fact is that YouTube does have a serious ongoing problem.

As The Free Thought Project has reported, while YouTube has ignored ISIS recruiting videos, it has chosen to label videos that show the United States committing war crimes, conducting airstrikes that kill innocent civilians and aiding the enemies it claims to be fighting as “extremist content” that is banned from the site.

The platform has also started openly targeting smaller channels by demonetizing them and removing the incentive for the creators to continue to attempt to grow their channels.

While there is no way to defend Nasim Aghdam’s actions, there are a number of glaring reasons why the shooting she carried out has been blacklisted by the mainstream media, as it does not fit the typical narrative and can hardly be used to rally against one race or religion, or to call for increased gun control. (For more from the author of “5 Compelling Reasons Why the YouTube Shooting Has Disappeared From Headlines” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Liberals Have Only Helped Blacks Fail

Adding to the jeremiads from the phalanx of skin-color pimps and harlots is Latonia Westerfield. I happened upon an article by Westerfield titled: “Why Black People Don’t Need Jason L. Riley’s Help.” (March 25, 2015)

Westerfield, as is typical with her kind, had her Hanes, Jockey’s, Victoria Secrets’ or whatever brand of unmentionables she wears, in a Gordian knot because in her mind conservative Jason Riley, had dared impugn the citadel of skin-color identity politics. The citadel Jason had besmirched was the cathedral of “if you’re black, you’re a victim.” . . .

Westerfield wrote: “[Riley’s] words are indicative of why in 2015, race and racism are still cause for black people to fill the streets in protest with their hands raised in the air, demanding that their lives be seen as valuable. This is because Riley’s book doesn’t say anything new, in terms of understanding and dealing with issues in black communities, but rather presents the same old argument that dates back to slave auctions—black culture and, by extension blackness is inherently defective, “’if the rise of other groups is any indication, black social and economic problems are less about politics than they are about culture.”’

If black lives mattered to liberals, 17.3 million black women wouldn’t have paid the progeny of Margaret Sanger’s “Negro Project” to murder their babies. If black lives mattered and liberal progressive policies actually helped – between 1976 and 2011, 94 percent of all blacks killed, wouldn’t have been killed by other black people.

Without going into the rest of Westerfield’s maudlin essay, her response validates what I have been saying all of my adult life, i.e., blacks are inculcated from cradle to grave to embrace being victims based upon color of skin. To her kind there is nothing as insufferable as a “black” person who isn’t a victim and who doesn’t harbor deep-seated antipathy against America, (read: white people). (Read more from “Liberals Have Only Helped Blacks Fail” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Kids Become Killers (Hint: It’s Not Guns)

. . .The absurdly politicized debate over core causes and prevention strategies generates far more heat than light. Liberals blame guns, the National Rifle Association and Republicans, while conservatives blame fatherlessness, godlessness and gun-free zones. But just as with most other life-and-death issues plaguing today’s painfully divided America, true consensus as to causes and cures always seems out of reach . . .

Before even delving into all the powerful factors involved, Whistleblower starts by documenting something overlooked by almost everyone – the tremendous copycat nature of the mass-killer phenomenon.

Citing recent research, including the peer-reviewed study “Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings,” Whistleblower reveals that many mass shooters are utterly mesmerized by previous mass murderers, including Sandy Hook killer Adam Lanza who researched multiple-fatality shootings going back to 1891 and maintained a wall of infamous shooters . . .

Whistleblower also explodes the myth that ultra-violent videogames don’t desensitize, corrupt and even serve as training for mass shooters. President Trump was correct when, following February’s school shooting in Parkland, Florida, he said he’s “hearing more and more people say the level of violence on video games is really shaping young people’s thoughts.” . . .

Despite what is heard from much of the news media today, the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights absolutely guarantees Americans’ right to keep and bear arms, says LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association. Americans have a right to own firearms for the defense of their family and home. They have a right to own firearms for hunting, shooting or collecting. And they even have a right to own firearms to break the chains of tyranny, if necessary. America’s Founding Fathers said it, the Constitution they gave us guarantees it, America’s courts affirm it, and her laws protect it. (Read more from “Why Kids Become Killers (Hint: It’s Not Guns)” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Did Withheld Information Help Acquit Pulse Shooter’s Wife?

Noor Salman, the wife of a terrorist who killed 49 people in the name of ISIS at an Orlando nightclub in 2016, has been found not guilty of charges connecting her to her husband’s jihadi rampage against innocents.

For well over a year, prosecutors have been making the case that she knew about Omar Mateen’s plans to attack the location, but did not attempt to stop him or alert police. Her defense team, however, claimed that she was abused by her husband and that she has a low IQ, rendering her not responsible for her actions as alleged by prosecutors.

The jury did not agree with the prosecutors. After three days of deliberations, the jury acquitted her on charges of obstruction and providing material support to a terrorist organization (ISIS).

It was revealed this week that prosecutors had withheld key information pertaining to the case, calling into question the evidence that has emerged over the past couple of years.

We learned that Seddique Mateen, the father of shooter Omar Mateen, had been an FBI informant from 2005 to 2016. In calling attention to the bombshell, Salman’s team made the case for a mistrial, which was denied by the judge presiding over the case. In continuing the case, the judge claimed that “it does not change the dynamic of whether Noor Salman aided and abetted.”

It’s unclear whether the Seddique Mateen information affected the outcome of the case, but it certainly helped the defense by calling into question the legitimacy of the prosecutors’ arguments.

For well over a year, prosecutors have been making the case that Salman played an integral role in plotting the attack. Before the terrorist attack, Salman reportedly drove with Mateen two hours to Orlando to case several sites, including Disney World and the LGBT nightclub.

In an interview with the New York Times, Salman admitted that she saw Mateen watching jihadist videos. Officials who secured Mateen’s electronic records said he frequently watched ISIS propaganda videos and radical sermons by the deceased al Qaeda preacher Anwar al-Awlaki.

Salman was with Mateen when he stocked up on ammunition, law enforcement officials told NBC News. Additionally, CBS reported that law enforcement had video footage from the ammo buy.

And before conducting the terrorist attack, which resulted in his death, Mateen added Salman to his life insurance policy and gave her access to his bank accounts, according to reports.

But all of that evidence couldn’t convince the jury of Salman’s guilt as a co-conspirator, after the bombshell revelation that the FBI had worked with the terrorist’s father as a paid informant for over a decade. (For more from the author of “Did Withheld Information Help Acquit Pulse Shooter’s Wife?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Threat to Independent Media Worse Than You Know

I feel like the prophet Jeremiah. He was always the prophet I did not want to be when I grew up. He not only was the bearer of bad news to Israel, but he did not exactly live a mostly comfortable life – like Ezekiel and Daniel.

But it’s been my misfortune to raise alarms about the devastating attacks by the Digital Cartel – Google-Facebook – on the independent media. They’ve been going on for a long time to be sure. But the scorched-earth policy began last summer – and it’s been killing sites like WND, Breitbart, Daily Caller, et al.

Just this week, for instance, Politico published a story almost gleefully reporting that my friends at have lost half their traffic and even more advertising during this siege by the politically motivated giants of the internet. Even if the reports are exaggerated, we’re talking about an imminent, existential threat to the biggest of the big independent media sites . . .

This war on us is not going away. We’re all in the same boat – and Google-Facebook are shooting holes in it. It’s a massive power play that not only threatens the independent media that were so important as a reality check in the 2016 presidential election but is crippling us in the critical 2018 election battle for control of Congress.

But it’s even bigger than that, I’m afraid. I honestly believe that this fight, at the end of the day, will determine whether or not freedom of speech on the internet will survive. I think the independent media are just the lab rats in a grand and gruesome experiment for total control of thought by the left. If the lab rats die, it will be on to stifling other voices through intimidation and humiliation. (Read more from “Threat to Independent Media Worse Than You Know” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Left-Wing ‘Fact-Checkers’ Meet Their Match

Abortion kills … Jacob Isaac, a Republican congressional candidate in Texas, issued the following statement in a League of Women Voters guide:

I will work to end abortion, which is the leading cause of death for black Americans and kills as many as 1,000 black children every day.

Our friends at NewsBusters have a lengthy rebuttal to a PolitiFact “fact-check” that rates this sentence as “mostly false.” PolitiFact uses CDC terminology and the fact that some pregnancies would have resulted in stillbirths and miscarriages to say the statement is false. As NewsBusters says, “All this tweaking your terminology doesn’t change the biological fact that a living human baby with human organs and limbs and bones is being destroyed in an abortion.”

Keeping the “fact-checkers” honest … The Media Research Center, which runs NewsBusters, announced a new project yesterday. “Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers” will serve as a check on the use of opinion masquerading as fact to say conservatives are not telling the truth. The article mentioned above is part of that new project. Keeping the fact-checkers honest is a full-time job.

Oopsie … Sometimes the words just don’t come out right, as Brian Kilmeade found out this morning. Tomi Lahren has been doing man-on-the-street interviews for Fox News lately. Kilmeade, in a hilarious gaffe, thanked Lahren for “working the streets – uh, for us.” Kilmeade quickly realized what he’d said, and co-host Ainsley Earhardt covered for him. It’s well worth the quick watch. This sort of thing happens to the best of us.

Yes, people are calling for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment … At the crack of dawn this morning, CNN’s Chris Cuomo replied to a tweet by saying, “this is a lot of bunk. no one calling for 2A repeal. Stop with the bogeymen.” That’s when Commentary’s Noah Rothman stepped in with five prominent calls for the repeal of the Second Amendment — just since Monday. According to Rothman, those calling for repeal included a former Supreme Court justice, a GWU law professor, an Esquire op-ed, A Seattle Times op-ed, and a Democratic candidate in California.

This doublespeak by liberal journalists isn’t going to work any more. For decades, they’ve hid their anti-freedom agenda by saying they weren’t calling for the banning of all guns or the repeal of the Second Amendment. But that is what the end goal has always been. And now prominent people are coming out and saying it.

It wasn’t grassroots … CNN really wants you to believe that the march to suppress natural rights over the weekend was a purely grassroots effort. The network even published an article about how the “March for Our Lives” event came together. It was heavy on saying it was student-organized. While mentioning the groups that really put the event on, it downplayed them as merely helping the students instead of being the main drivers.

(For more from the author of “Left-Wing ‘Fact-Checkers’ Meet Their Match” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Did It Take Two Weeks to Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?

“Can you believe these kids?” It’s been a recurring theme of the coverage of the Parkland school shooting: the remarkable effectiveness of the high school students who created a gun control organization in the wake of the massacre. In seemingly no time, the magical kids had organized events ranging from a national march to a mass school walkout, and they’d brought in a million dollars in donations from Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney. . .

In other words, the response was professionalized. That’s not surprising, because this is what organization that gets results actually looks like. It’s not a bunch of magical kids in somebody’s living room. Nor is it surprising that the professionalization happened right off the bat. Broward County’s teacher’s union is militant, and Rep. Ted Lieu stated on Twitter that his family knows Parkland student activist David Hogg’s family, so there were plenty of opportunities for grown-ups with resources and skills to connect the kids.

On Twitter, I lost track of the number of bluechecks rhapsodizing over how effective the kids’ organizational instincts were. But organizing isn’t instinctive. It’s skilled work; you have to learn how to do it, and it takes really a lot of people. You don’t just get a few magical kids who’re amazing and naturally good at it.

The real tip-off should have been the $500,000 donations from Winfrey and Clooney. Big celebrities don’t give huge money to strangers on a whim. Somebody who knows Winfrey and Clooney called them and asked. But the press’s response was to be ever more impressed with the kids.

For two weeks, journalists abjectly failed in their jobs, which is to tell the public what’s going on. And any of them who had any familiarity with organizing campaigns absolutely knew. Matt Pearce, of the Los Angeles Times, would have been ideally placed to write an excellent article: not only is he an organizer for the Times’s union, he moderated a panel on leftist activism for the LA Times Book Festival and has the appropriate connections in organizing. Instead, he wrote about a school walkout, not what was behind it. (Read more from “Why Did It Take Two Weeks to Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Soros and Planned Parenthood-Sponsored ‘March for Our Lives’ Hypocritically Protests Our Only Real Protection Against Violent Crime

Police are on our side, for the most part, and many of them lay their lives on the line nightly to serve and protect fellow Americans and immigrants in neighborhoods that the rest of us avoid. But do they have a legal duty to respond quickly or effectively to our 9-1-1 calls?

No. If police arrive in time to prevent a tragedy, that’s nice, but it’s up to them. They aren’t legally obligated to dispatch, patrol or operate well. It’s been litigated from different angles, and it was eventually settled by the Supreme Court.

In March 1975, two men kicked down a Washington DC single mother’s door and raped her. Two upstairs neighbors heard her screams, called 9-1-1 and were told help was on the way. But it wasn’t.

When they didn’t arrive for 12 minutes, the neighbors called 9-1-1 again and were told again to sit tight, that police were coming. One shouted down to encourage the downstairs mom that police were en route.

This alerted the rapists to the women upstairs. They broke into the upstairs apartment, kidnapped all three women at knife-point, and for the next 14 hours, beat them, raped them, robbed them and forced them to perform sexual acts on one another.

The victims later sued the District of Columbia municipal government, which employs the police. The government fought the women’s lawsuit and did not settle out of court. That city, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in America, argued in court that its police owed no specific duty to the brutalized victims. The courts agreed.

The Supreme Court settled the law on this issue in a 2005 ruling. In that case, police failed to enforce a court order against a Colorado ex-husband who abducted his three daughters, ages 7, 9 and 10. The girls’ mother reported the abduction and violation of the court order, and provided reliable information on their location, but police did not follow up. The ex-husband later shot his three girls dead.

The bereaved mother later sued, based on the court order’s language that “you shall arrest” the violator. When the lawsuit reached its final appeal, the Court held that the fatal inaction was “within a well-established tradition of police discretion” despite “apparently mandatory arrest statutes.” The law of the land, since 2005, is that you have no legal right to police protection.

You do, however, have a legal right to keep and bear arms. The government is Constitutionally prohibited to infringe that right. And so you have a capacity, if you can keep it, to protect yourself, your daughters and your downstairs neighbor from violent criminals.

The 2nd Amendment was under attack Saturday, just across town from where the three women were overwhelmed and dehumanized by knife-wielding criminals in 1975. March for Our Lives organizers claimed that 2 million adolescent supporters participated, including over 800 “sibling events” across the nation. They assure us that their attack on gun rights will continue during the midterm elections this Fall.

If you have trouble remembering which is the March for Life and which is the March for Our Lives, just remember that the March for Life is the annual prolife rally that is largely ignored by the mainstream media, not breathlessly promoted. Or you can remember that the March for Life is a protest against the killing of over 60 million defenseless, unborn American children since the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision.

The March for Our Lives, on the other hand, was partially funded by Planned Parenthood, an organization that has committed 8,058,657 abortions, by one count, since 1970.

“Everyone has a right,” Planned Parenthood tweeted Saturday with breathtaking irony, to lead “a life that is healthy and free of violence.” A Planned Parenthood spokesperson boasted to BuzzFeed News that the government-subsidized organization is “teaching and hosting trainings” for young anti-gun activists. They provided the students with “logistics, strategy and planning” assistance. Likewise, underwitten by billionaire immigrant George Soros.

But the March for Our Lives is also funded by a number of large contributions from Hollywood celebrities, entertainers and corporate donors, including $50,000 from Joshua Kushner, brother of Trump son-in-law Jared. Some of the celebrities attended the anti-gun rally, protected by armed security.

Law enforcement failures are apparently of little interest to the NeverAgain movement. The police officer who stood inert in front of the high school he was assigned to protect, the ignored warnings about the shooter’s intentions, the FBI’s failure to follow up – none of this seems to matter as much as the opportunity to launch impassioned attacks on Republicans and the NRA. Why not?

At what point do we admit that this is not a children’s crusade? Hardened leftist adults, with other fish to fry, have provided its infrastructure, funding and even its goals. The kids have compelling and tragic stories that give them value to people who would have happily crushed their skulls and dismembered them less than two decades ago. But the kids are not in control of this movement.

I’m not a mind-reader. I don’t know how sincere the adolescents are. I’m not sure that I could have resisted, at their age, the seduction of the spotlight, the opportunity to feel like a rock star. It wouldn’t be fair to expect wisdom of them. Not now.

Although a few have surprised us: Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv, for example, considers himself a NeverAgain supporter but seeks a middle ground of hardening targets and improving security without infringing his fellow citizens’ right to keep and bear arms.

“The only way change will be accomplished,” the high school junior said, “is if we stop using inflammatory language, we sit down and have a logical discussion, we don’t call the person the enemy, we don’t shout at them and we don’t boo them. That’s the only way a positive change will be made.”

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.