The author confesses that he owns a pair of the comfy plastic clogs pictured at left and aside from slippery surfaces, would wear his Crocs anywhere. As it turns out, detractors of the fashionable footwear may have a point.
Believe it or not, Crocs have been known to cause harm to children - on escalators. Snopes.com references several situations of youths getting caught in the teeth of escalators - injuring themselves either at the top or at the bottom of the escalator. The article references the common factor in the injuries is that all the injured children were wearing Crocs.
However, we would like to point out two other commonalities: In the instances quoted, the injured were children and they were riding escalators. It all comes down to one's perspective.
The debate about the rights to bear arms is a hot-button issue, with millions of dollars spent by advocates for and against the right of Americans to bear arms as referred to by the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The current day application of these 27 words have been heavily debated over the years. Taking a historical perspective, the bill was written in reaction to British law, which temporarily suspended the right of certain citizens to bear arms (based on religion). Colonists also stated their need to own (bear) arms in defense from raiding natives and to raise up militia to protect themselves
This week - a year after the tragic shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, that took the lives of 26 people in only 11 minutes and 17 months after a tragic shooting in Aurora, Colorado, that saw 12 people killed and 70 injured - a high school student in Centennial, Colorado, shot and killed a schoolmate during a short spree.
Proponents of civilian gun ownership would say that any sort of legislation limiting the rights to bear arms would be the first steps in banning all civilian arms ownership. Or that taking the guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens would put more guns in the hands of criminals.
This is not an argument for or against gun ownership. This is a commentary. However, this is a society where a man can shoot an unarmed teen for being in the wrong neighborhood and appearing dangerous; another man can kill a prostitute for taking his money and not having sex with him (an illegal act); or a mentally disturbed man can kill six people and wound several others- including a Congresswoman - even though his father knew he was so disturbed the father would disable the family car at night.
No matter what one's perspective is on the right to own and/or possess arms, this question still remains:
What practical use would an average American civilian have to own a semi-automatic machine gun - easily converted into an automatic - that can shoot 50-60 bullets a minute, as well as being able attach a drum that holds 100 rounds?