Nevada Public Radio Listen Live

"KNPR's State of Nevada"
Facebook Twitter Follow Nevada Public Radio

Support Nevada Public Radio
KNPR's State of Nevada About SON Archives Participate Specials
TOP STORIES

What's On Your Mind?
What's On Your Mind?

Listen
AIR DATE: January 14, 2013

We're asking you: What's on your mind? Hearings have begun in the Aurora shooting trial, which has stoked discussions of gun control. Nevada recently received a D grade from a group that evaluates efforts to reform schools. And we just emerged from the shadow of the fiscal cliff. So what should we do about taxes, education and guns?
 
GUESTS
 
James P. Reza, small business owner and "Ask a Native" columnist for Vegas Seven
Nelson Santiago, spokesman, Nevada Hispanics
Maggie McLetchie, attorney, McLetchie Law
 
LINKS

 

    comments powered by Disqus
    COMMENTS:
    Gold mining (and all extractive industries) depends on 2 factors: 1. The quality of the deposit (and Nevada's gold deposit is the second best in the world--next to South America) 2. The market price Neither of these are controlled by the mining company, yet when the market price goes up (as people buy more and as the economy worsens), 100% of the benefit is raked off by the mining company. The State should take a lesson from Sarah Palin and take an increasing percentage as the price increases. Alaska now gets 90% of the benefit of its oil extraction when the market price reaches a certain level. The cost of extracting gold in Nevada ranges between $100 and $600 per ounce. Is it too much to expect the State to receive 20-50% when the price reaches $1000/oz up to 90% when it exceeds $2000/oz? Or is our state going to continue kowtowing to people like Sen. Reid and Governor Sandoval--and their adoration with the 1872 mining law--and continue turning over 100% of gold revenues to the companies when the price reaches $3000, as will occur sooner rather than later--especially if the Feds keep borrowing a trillion dollars a year.
    ed uehlingJan 9, 2013 10:47:28 AM
    Can anyone please discuss why strict gun control appears to negatively affect overall violent crime rates? According to the British Home Office there were 747,000 reported instances of violent crime between June 2011 - June 2012. In a country of 62.5 million That's a rate of 1195.2 per 100k. Compare that to 386.3 per 100k in 2011 in the U.S. as reported by the FBI. And please stop trying to compare us to Australia. Their violent crime rate for 2007 (the latest data that I could find)was ~1022 per 100k. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_283456.pdf http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...tables/table-1 http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent%20crime.html
    Ty Jan 9, 2013 09:48:44 AM
    © 2014 NEVADA PUBLIC RADIO   
    Web hosting facilities provided by Switch.