PUBLIC OPINION > It Was Time to Read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Rights
Immediately after being caught by the police, officials decided not to read Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda rights (“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law…”) with the caveat that he might be an immediate threat to the public’s safety. But after a couple days of questioning Tsarnaev, the 19-year-old suspect was finally read his rights — and consequentially stopped responding to questions.
When horrific acts of terror are committed, rights become a tricky thing. So the L.A. Times wanted to know what the general consensus was on the fact that Tsarnaev was finally read his rights. Who thought it was the fair thing to do? And who says it wasn’t necessary? Most people thought it was time for Tsarnaev to be read his rights, with 57% voting in favor of it. But the devil’s in the details. Let’s get to it.
PUBLIC OPINION > The Public Is Split on Whether Bombing Suspect Should Be Tried as ‘Enemy Combatant’
On Friday evening, the surviving Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was finally captured and on Monday, he was officially charged with an act of terror while still recovering from serious wounds in a hospital. Though Dzhokhar has been charged for the bombing at the Boston Marathon, the White House has decided that he will not be treated as an enemy combatant and will instead be prosecuted through America’s civilian system of justice.
Though the administration has already decided, we wanted to know how the public thinks this suspect should be handled. Looks like there’s no clear answer, with the public evenly split (50-50) on the issue. But let’s see who’s on what side.
PUBLIC OPINION > Most People Are Comfortable Naked
After learning that Allure magazine’s “Look Better Naked” issue will hit newsstands on April 22 with the goal of encouraging people to feel more comfortable in the buff, we wondered how many of you actually needed the encouragement. AdriHead asked and you answered, and while people are pretty split, a slim majority (52%) say they feel pretty comfortable in the buff. Read on to find out who is ready to strip down and who prefers to keep their clothes on.
PUBLIC OPINION: Banned American Apparel Ad Isn’t That Bad
American Apparel is known for its racy advertisements and this time, they’ve gotten the Brits upset. Britain’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) recently banned an ad by the racy company for being “overtly sexual” and “demeaning to women” — but the majority of you don’t think it’s that bad. 54% voted that the ad was “fine” while 46% said it was “way too sexy.” Find out who thinks it’s fine — and who thinks it’s too sexy.
PUBLIC OPINION > It Shouldn’t Be Illegal To Look at Your Cell Phone While Driving
A California appellate court recently ruled that it’s illegal to look at your cell phone while driving, which means no getting directions on Google maps, no checking email and definitely no reading texts. Many Californians are still adjusting to not being allowed to talk on the phone and drive, so the LA Times wanted to know what you thought of this latest ruling.
They asked and you answered, and it turns out that the majority does not agree with the court. 65% voted that it shouldn’t be illegal to look at your phone while driving. Let’s dig a little deeper shall we?
PUBLIC OPINION > The Morning-After Pill Should Be Available to All Ages
When it comes to teenagers and contraception, you can guarantee that there’s going to be a disagreement on how to handle the matter — and Fox News’ poll last week proved it. Last week, a federal judge ruled that the morning-after pill, also known as Plan B, must be made available over the counter for women of all ages. There’s definitely been some criticism since the decision, but who’s doing the criticizing? And who agrees with the judge that all women — including young teenagers — should have access to the pill? Let’s dive.
PUBLIC OPINION > Mayor Bloomberg’s Proposal to Hide Cigarettes Is a Bad Idea
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg keeps striking out. Back in February, he announced his intention to ban Styrofoam and the majority of you voted that it was a bad idea. Now he’s targeting cigarettes with a proposal to keep tobacco products hidden in stores, and once again the majority (64%) isn’t on board. Read on to find out who is opposed to his latest idea and who agreed with his rationale.
PUBLIC OPINION > Gay Marriage Advocates Have the Better Argument for Same-Sex Marriage
There’s no denying that gay marriage is currently a hot-button issue. While the Supreme Court deliberates on two landmark gay marriage cases — the federal Defense of Marriage Act written by former president Bill Clinton and California’s Proposition 8, a voter-approved proposition banning same sex marriage in the state — American people all over are discussing how the cases will likely pan out.
So which side has the more compelling argument in regards to gay marriage? During his show last week, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly surprisingly said the more compelling argument is on the side of gay marriage advocates. And it looks like the majority of you, at 66%, agree. But you know that this controversial debate isn’t that cut and dry. Let’s dive.
PUBLIC OPINION > A Better Condom Is a Brilliant Idea
Condoms help prevent pregnancy and the spread of STDs, but the conventional wisdom is that they make sex less pleasurable, particularly for males. Thus, most men view condoms as a “necessary evil” — best case scenario. Worst case, couples opt to leave them behind and their risky behavior produces tragic results.
Realizing this, Bill Gates announced that he’s willing to give $100,000 to anyone who can come up with “The Next Generation Condom.” This winning idea would need to be a condom design that doesn’t reduce sexual pleasure for either party, and if possible, makes it more pleasurable than if you didn’t use one. Naturally we wanted to know what you thought about Gates’ contest. It turns out, 55% of you think it’s “brilliant.” Read on to find out who was in the majority — and who was not so keen on the idea.
PUBLIC OPINION > Higher Taxes Stop People From Moving to Places Like New York and California
Left-wing talk show host Bill Maher surprised his “Real Time” audience recently by disagreeing with MSNBC host Rachel Maddow’s stance on taxes. Maher spoke out against the high tax rates claiming, “And here in California, I just want to say liberals — you could actually lose me. It’s outrageous what we’re paying — over 50 percent. I’m willing to pay my share, but yeah it’s ridiculous.”
Newsmax took note of this and wanted to know where you stand on the issue, so they asked if high tax rates would stop you from moving to places with notoriously high tax rates, like New York or California. Over four hundred SodaHeads voted and we reached a verdict: an overwhelming majority of you (73%) wouldn’t move to New York or California because of the high tax rates. However, as always, some demographics veered away from the majority more than others.