TASK DEFINITION: Categorize the comment on the basis of threat. If the comment is threatening output Yes, otherwise output No.
PROBLEM: Spice will never be the same problem as hard drugs (Coke, Heroin, Meth). Existing hard drugs turn people into crack heads and junkies for many years, maybe even a decade before they die or get clean. Spice kills it's users quickly, this Spice epidemic will be over in a couple years, people stupid enough to use it will die.

SOLUTION: Yes

PROBLEM: Hillary will be slinging mud soon enough, and it will be nasty.

SOLUTION: Yes

PROBLEM: With fully computerized records, it is difficult to imagine why a background check should take more than three days. The story above asserts the bill was prompted by an incident where a murderer purchased a gun in South Carolina after authorities failed to produce a background time in the allotted 3 day window. What the story and presumably supporters of the bill do not tell us is whether a completed background check allowed by a 10 day window would have stopped the sale, i.e. would the shooter have been denied if the check was completed.

I can see zero reason for a background check to take more than 3 days (given the fully computerized records). The ten day window will likely only be used to arbitrarily delay approvals to provide a de facto 10 day waiting period for fully legal gun purchasers. That might be a good idea, but promoters of the bill should be honest about their objectives.

SOLUTION:
Yes