Who decided that EVERYONE in our nation needs guns? I want to know exactly what the idea behind the making of this amendment. Ever since our founding fathers made it legal in the 2nd Amendment for citizens to "bear arms," it has made our country a much more dangerous place to live in.
What good comes from guns? The answer is absolutely nothing. Some critics may say it is for "protection" from burglars, muggers, etc. But if guns weren't sold to citizens in the first place, we wouldn't need to defend ourselves with them. Mase or a baseball bat work perfectly fine as a defense against an attacker. I personally will never buy a gun.
With guns, crimes such as robberies and rapes increase drastically. You are completely helpless if someone points a gun in your face. A gun symbolizes fear, aggression, and death. Why would we want that in our nation? Why would we want that around our familes? There is nothing scarier than the thought of death. Death can come very fast and very abrubtly just from one pull of the trigger. It can ruin lives physically and emotionally.
Anyone can get a hold of a gun in America. What happens if someone with an anger management problem gets their hands on a gun? Would you want that person around you carrying a gun, knowing that they could overreact and snap if even the slightest thing upsets them?
The United Kingdom has absolutely no firearms. Not even their law enforcement carries a gun. As a result, their crime rate is dramatically lower than ours. If it's working for them, why not us? Why don't we eliminate guns completely?
The very existance of guns makes each and every person more cautious. People make sure they lock their doors to their houses and cars. Barely anyone walks around at night in fear of an attacker. We can stop living in fear with the elimination of guns.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Piracy
by David Chan
There are three traditional ways to watch a movie. You can go to see it in the theaters, and buy or rent it on dvd. However, with the advent of peer-to-peer file sharing, the internet literate population is finding an alternative way to view movies. Sharing of copyrighted movies is of course illegal, but the method by which the MPAA, Motion picture Association of America, is going about in dealing with the situation is deplorable and foolish. The MPAA has in the past sued individuals for sharing and downloading pirated movies especially those unsuspecting college students. Currently the MPAA has a deal with UMass where the internet usage of students is monitors so that any copyright infringement is reported to the MPAA. To combat cam recording in theaters, the MPAA introduced frisking and large fines. The MPAA has event begun to indoctrinate children to copyright laws and piracy by sponsoring lectures on the subject for the Boy Scouts.
http://www.politechbot.com/2005/11/04/how-the-mpaa/
Instead of threatening people by introducing ridiculous fines and having movie goer suffer the humiliations of frisks, maybe the MPAA should focus on offering a movie going experience that supersedes the convenience of copyright infringement. The methods the MPAA have been using are largely ineffective. They continue to draw more disapproval because they treat the movie watching masses as children that don't know any better than to steal. They set examples by slapping large fines on people and they attempt to deter us with threats. If anything, the actions of the MPAA have only encouraged more people to pirate and infringe. Most people would rather watch a movie they deem worthy at the theaters than on a 22" computer monitor. Until the MPAA have figured out what they're doing wrong, copyright infringement will continue to grow undeterred and the MPAA will continue to lose money.
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/03/mpaa_piracy.html
http://www.tuxick.net/pics/piracy2.jpg
There are three traditional ways to watch a movie. You can go to see it in the theaters, and buy or rent it on dvd. However, with the advent of peer-to-peer file sharing, the internet literate population is finding an alternative way to view movies. Sharing of copyrighted movies is of course illegal, but the method by which the MPAA, Motion picture Association of America, is going about in dealing with the situation is deplorable and foolish. The MPAA has in the past sued individuals for sharing and downloading pirated movies especially those unsuspecting college students. Currently the MPAA has a deal with UMass where the internet usage of students is monitors so that any copyright infringement is reported to the MPAA. To combat cam recording in theaters, the MPAA introduced frisking and large fines. The MPAA has event begun to indoctrinate children to copyright laws and piracy by sponsoring lectures on the subject for the Boy Scouts.
http://www.politechbot.com/2005/11/04/how-the-mpaa/
Instead of threatening people by introducing ridiculous fines and having movie goer suffer the humiliations of frisks, maybe the MPAA should focus on offering a movie going experience that supersedes the convenience of copyright infringement. The methods the MPAA have been using are largely ineffective. They continue to draw more disapproval because they treat the movie watching masses as children that don't know any better than to steal. They set examples by slapping large fines on people and they attempt to deter us with threats. If anything, the actions of the MPAA have only encouraged more people to pirate and infringe. Most people would rather watch a movie they deem worthy at the theaters than on a 22" computer monitor. Until the MPAA have figured out what they're doing wrong, copyright infringement will continue to grow undeterred and the MPAA will continue to lose money.
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/03/mpaa_piracy.html
http://www.tuxick.net/pics/piracy2.jpg
Madi Vivian- Gay Marraige
Today, it seems as though the topic of gay marriage is very talked about. Aside from being extremely popular—people also seem to still be arguing about it; therefore making it extremely controversial. I, personally, believe that if two people are in love or want to settle down with each other by “tying the knot”, then they should be granted that ability, no matter what their sex is.
Throughout history, things like abortion and women’s rights and, now, gay marriage, have been extremely controversial—but when considering, do the people who are against gay marriage have a real argument? The only argument that I usually hear from people against the gay community is that “it is just not right for the same sex to be together” or that “G-d meant for a male and female to be together—not both”. I laugh when I hear this.
Two of my best friends are gay. They are the nicest, funniest, and most down to earth people I know. But this isn’t because they are “gay”. It’s just because AS A PERSON, each individually are great. Growing up in a tight community—which doesn’t accept gays as easily—it was very hard for each of them to accept even themselves as what they are. I couldn’t fathom the fact that someone may argue against their happiness.
A person’s sexuality is like a straight person having a certain “taste” in the opposite sex. You cannot change the fact that you may like another male or female. The people that are trying to take away/ are against gays having the ability to marry, to me, are evil. Getting married is a persons’ decision, and if two people want to spend the rest of their lives with eachother—then, no matter their gender—they should be granted that ability.
Throughout history, things like abortion and women’s rights and, now, gay marriage, have been extremely controversial—but when considering, do the people who are against gay marriage have a real argument? The only argument that I usually hear from people against the gay community is that “it is just not right for the same sex to be together” or that “G-d meant for a male and female to be together—not both”. I laugh when I hear this.
Two of my best friends are gay. They are the nicest, funniest, and most down to earth people I know. But this isn’t because they are “gay”. It’s just because AS A PERSON, each individually are great. Growing up in a tight community—which doesn’t accept gays as easily—it was very hard for each of them to accept even themselves as what they are. I couldn’t fathom the fact that someone may argue against their happiness.
A person’s sexuality is like a straight person having a certain “taste” in the opposite sex. You cannot change the fact that you may like another male or female. The people that are trying to take away/ are against gays having the ability to marry, to me, are evil. Getting married is a persons’ decision, and if two people want to spend the rest of their lives with eachother—then, no matter their gender—they should be granted that ability.
Stanley Tam
Every high school student, at some point, will tell their friends that they will never join a fraternity or a sorority. They think that these groups are full of “fake” friends and in order to obtain them, you have to pay a due. Simply said, it is like buying friends. Likely, you would hear them say “only losers with no friends join Greek life”. Stereotypes and controversial matters are always involved within these groups. Most people think that people who like to party and have fun will decide to become apart of it and those who are fuck up their academics because of the partying. I believe there are too many negative stereotypes involving Greek life.
Until you become familiar with one, you will then be able to acknowledge the family aspect of it.
In order to become a part of the family, you must complete a pledging process. It is true that the pledging process can be seen as harsh and can even consider as being hazing, but this is not necessarily true. Everything a respectable fraternity or sorority does has been experienced by a actives when they were pledges themselves. It is safe to know that you are not alone; you are not the only one experiencing this type of treatment. These types of events will most likely have a meaning behind it, and in order to become a part of the family, you must learn the lessons that are taught behind them, even if they might seem like hazing.
I have friends in a fraternity and they tell me stories about the brotherhood they share. He has brothers who treat him like he is blood. They care, respect, and love him. He tells me that it is not mainly about parties
Until you become familiar with one, you will then be able to acknowledge the family aspect of it.
In order to become a part of the family, you must complete a pledging process. It is true that the pledging process can be seen as harsh and can even consider as being hazing, but this is not necessarily true. Everything a respectable fraternity or sorority does has been experienced by a actives when they were pledges themselves. It is safe to know that you are not alone; you are not the only one experiencing this type of treatment. These types of events will most likely have a meaning behind it, and in order to become a part of the family, you must learn the lessons that are taught behind them, even if they might seem like hazing.
I have friends in a fraternity and they tell me stories about the brotherhood they share. He has brothers who treat him like he is blood. They care, respect, and love him. He tells me that it is not mainly about parties
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)