@polisciawesomewow @voxeclexnat @mrcoolguy22 @playerone77 @politicschmolitics @petravndjklmrt @unlpols2 @penser12
Ray-Ban Sunglasses

@theartofmadeline

if i look back, i am lost

Discoholic 🪩
Sweet Seals For You, Always

Origami Around
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Show & Tell

oozey mess

Love Begins
No title available
hello vonnie
Game of Thrones Daily
NASA

No title available
KIROKAZE

Andulka

shark vs the universe

JVL
Today's Document
Xuebing Du

seen from New Zealand

seen from Colombia
seen from Colombia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Egypt

seen from Argentina

seen from United States

seen from Türkiye
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from United States
@my-anonymous123
@polisciawesomewow @voxeclexnat @mrcoolguy22 @playerone77 @politicschmolitics @petravndjklmrt @unlpols2 @penser12
Ray-Ban Sunglasses
Romans and Americans
The way the Romans act in Julius Caesar are similar to the way a lot of Americans act today. After battle, Caesar and Romans celebrated his victorious defeat. Since Caesar is well-liked and respected, Brutus fears that the Romans will want Caesar to be king. At this time Caesar is so powerful that he rejects the crown three times from Antony, “…and , as I told you, he put it by once…Then he offered it to him again; then he put it by again; but to my thinking he was very loath to lay his fingers off of it. And then he offered it a third time. He put it the third time by…” (Act 1, Sc.2) which he could do because he knew that he was already the most powerful man even though he would be a terrible ruler because he is meant to be a warrior.
In the play Julius Caesar, the assassination of Julius Caesar, and the influence of Brutus, this play exemplifies the way politics have worked for years and years. With the power that Caesar holds and the popularity he has amongst the people, he ignores his wife and the letter from Artemedius because he doesn’t think there is any possible way that he would be assassinated, but he was wrong, “Liberty! Freedom! Tyranny is dead! Run hence, proclaim, cry it about the streets.” (Act. 3. Sc.1) Cinna chanted after Caesar is assassinated. Then Brutus rises against Caesar saying “not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more. (Act. 3. Sc.2) Brutus’ speech announces that Caesar did not care about the people whatsoever. The way the Romans reacted to Brutus’ speech, and then following Antony’s speech are similar how Americans are when they hear the last politician speak, they’re usually in favor with the last speaker.
Julius Caesar is a perfect example of the political operatives we have in our country. I’m not saying all politicians are similar to Julius Caesar but most have the same tactics today that occurred in 44 B.C. (When Caesar died). Politicians will say whatever or do what Americans want to hear to receive popularity; similar to what Caesar does when he refuses the crown three times. Caesar isn’t refusing the crown because he is too modest or kind to take it. He’s refusing the crown because he knows that he is already in power and he is giving the Romans want they want, false reality and that he actually cares about them.
I want to note that people say philosophy isn’t important to today’s society, in which they are wrong. What they don’t realize is the same issues that previous philosophers encountered and discussed; still occur in today’s society. Often times, people complain about the democracy that they live in. Ironically, most of the people who complain usually don’t do anything about the issue. For example, if people do not like their representatives, they have the civic duty to vote; whether or not they take advantage of it is up to them. The problem is they are not informed about political issues like healthcare, property taxes, income taxes, etc. issues that would benefit them. Instead, they focus more on who is connected to whom and will vote for who their friend is voting for.
This is why most people say it’s important to have connections to be in politics, it’s not about how smart you are, it’s about who you know. You People today were similar to Romans, Romans didn’t know much about their politics, they just believed what the next person told them, and they never were politically engaged.
"We can kind of put police in a better light around the holidays," Lowell Police Detective Gordy Lauren said of the Secret Santa video.
After reading this article, I thought of Dr. Kohen's final lecture today on heroism, the good life, doing a nice deed, etc. Michigan cops hand out holiday gifts to people who they pulled over for minor charges, example: tinted windows. Since they were pulling over drivers with minor chargers, that don't really matter, I thought it was a nice deed to give out presents. Perhaps, they're doing this because the recent negativity with police officers and our justice system. This shows an example of living the good life by doing a nice deed to someone who they do not know. Recently, ALL cops have been portrayed to be evil, and I thought this was a good way for officers to show that they care about their community!
BERKELEY, Calif. (AP) — Protests in New York and Missouri have died down, but angry crowds in one California city famous for activism spent much of the weekend blocking traffic
Dating all the way back to the 1700s, protests aren’t new to America. But nowadays how effective are they really? In my opinion, protesting has always been a method used in order for the people to bring justice to an unjust situation. And it would seem that bringing justice is exactly what the peaceful protesters want. However, the peaceful protesters, as seen in this article, are often overtake by people who take advantage of the situation and turn the protests violent. More and more it seems that protests for justice turn to riots. These riots do nothing but cause damage, harm others, and make people angry. Therefore, we must ask the question, are the protests for justice worth the end result of a riot? I don’t believe that they are. Unfortunately, although we’ve seen protests work in the past, it doesn’t seem as though they are as effective at resulting in justice as they were in the past. For example, women protested for their right to vote because they felt an injustice was being done to them by their right to vote being barred. They peacefully protested and they found justice in gaining the right to vote. While I understand that many people feel an injustice has been done in the cases of these police officers, it is my opinion that they need to find more effective ways of finding justice. It seems that protesting just isn’t doing the trick any longer.
I agree with these sentiments, protesting has been a longtime, and in the past effective way to promote a stance on an issue. However recently, protesting just doesn’t seen to carry as much weight for one reason or another. The reason behind it fluctuates, but could be factors such as how protests are now portrayed in the media to the influence of big money on the political system. Probably the latter. As the politics is currently more about getting reelected than enacting policy, causes that are promoted by protesters are often causes that don’t generate money for reelection campaigns. The good life in being able to openly, legally protest unjust policy is definitely dwindling in influence, and how can people influence policy if the ones in charge of policy don’t listen.
Violent protests can be very dangerous to innocent people, which is why I don't care for violent protest. Especially in the article when it gives examples like that rioters who have been throwing rocks at officers, not all officers are bad people, is it fair that they are mistreated? Since so many people are angry, which they have the right to be angry, they've turned to violent protesting, which has received the media attention that they want. There have been plenty of non-violent protesters like MLK, Alice Paul, Gandhi, etc. and they delivered the message that they wanted to spread.
On the other hand, Mrcoolguy22 brings out good point that people can't influence policy if the ones who are in charge don't listen. These violent protests have gotten a lot of attention. I think that more that people see other people being violent on television, the more they're willing to follow. In the end, I don't think violent protesting is the way to seek justice and to get back at police officers because peaceful protesters have also gained media attention.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton announce plans to give new training to police officers.
After the grand jury declined to indict police officer Daniel Pantaleo, the public is outraged, protesting the streets of New York. I read an article where the spouse of Eric Garner is so upset; she is not accepting the cop’s apology or wanting anything to do with the cop. I think that the decline to indict police officer Pantaleo was a mistake and unfair to the family members of Garner. I wanted to share this article because May de Blasio and the NY Police Department Commissioner, Bill Bratton, announced that they plan to train police officers and to treat all citizens with equal respect. When in fact the officers should have been trained to respect the citizens equally and respect their safety before this incident occurred.
(Reuters) - An Atlanta family was saved by its dog when the German Shepherd jumped up and took gunfire directed at their car during a road rage incident between the occupants of two other vehicles, police
We’ve discussed the traits of heroism almost every class session. We’ve tried to determine a profile of a hero. I believe one of the main criteria is that the person who is a hero takes a serious risk, usually risking their life.
A dog in Atlanta died after an argument between two vehicles resulted in gunfire. The car the dog was riding in, with his family, was caught in the crossfire. The dog, Noah, leapt in front of one of the children in the car, protecting her from the gunfire. The wounded dog then jumped out of the vehicle and chased the car that was the source of the gunfire, until he could not go any further and died of his wounds during his chase.
Many are proclaiming this dog as a hero, since he prevented the young girl from being shot, taking the bullets himself. It would fit into our criteria of a hero. The dog protected someone from major harm, only to be the one to actually suffer.
But should Noah the dog actually be proclaimed a “hero”?
We’ve all heard the stories of hero animals. Animals that save their families from fires, or those that save their owners from heart attacks or seizure episodes. What makes these episodes of heroism less important than those committed by humans?
However, to be a hero, does one have to have the capacity to know what they are doing? Or does having a natural reaction to do something that may turn out as heroic qualify someone as a hero?
This leads to my main question- do you have to be human to be a hero?
First off, I feel bad for the three children that had to witness this road rage going on. The argument that occurred with the driver in the Taurus and the passenger another car is ridiculous. It ended with gun shots and the loss of a family dog from a different car.
This class has taught me the difference between someone who is doing a nice deed and someone who is considered to be hero, usually by risking their life, like you said. This is an interesting article because I think that if the dog was a human, that person would automatically be considered a hero. Since it is a dog, it may sound absurd to say a dog is hero to some people. If Noah specifically went in front one of the children to protect her, then I would consider Noah a hero even though he was “highly trained.” He is considered a hero because he was protecting the girl from this terrible incident, risking his life.
Aristotle and Friendship
Aristotle finds friendship crucial, important, and an element of need to a person’s life. He has three different kinds of friendship in which people relate to in today’s society. Some of the arguments that Aristotle makes about friendship are important to note to yourself. People often mistake acquaintances as friends, when in reality you have nothing in common with that person anymore. After reading Aristotle’s views on friendship and talking about friendship in lecture, what defines a true friendship?
If you think that a true friendship is someone who you hung out with every day as a child/teenager and every once in a while you catch up with via social media, does that make him or her a good friend to you? Aristotle argues with his two views on friendship that these types of friendships do not last long and eventually fade away. You no longer have anything in common with this friend because you two grew apart from each other and have separate lives. Depending on what part of chapter you are in your life, reflects that people you hang out with.
Though Aristotle’s first two views on friendships don’t last long, they are important because you don’t have to have long-term friends or someone who is considered a true friend compared to a good person. The first friendship is based off of both friends benefit from each other and have a ‘like to like’ relationship. In the second friendship the men must mutually recognize the goodness in their relationship and that pleasure will change over time as they change. “…Those who love for the sake of pleasure; it is not for their character that men love ready-witted people, but because they found them pleasant.” (Ethics, 1060) Going more in depth with his first two views on friendship, it is important to note the difference between good men and good friends. Just because you think a man is a nice person, doesn’t make him a good friend, it makes him a nice person. A man who utilizes these two views of friendship is benefiting for himself and not for the other person and vice versa for the other man.
In Aristotle’s third view on friendship, he notes that most of the time this is considered to be a true friendship. His third view on friendship defines what a true friend is compared to who a good person is. “Perfect friendship is the friendship of men who are good and alike in virtue; for these wish well alike to each other qua good, and they their sake are most truly friends; for they do this by reason of their own nature and not incidentally…” (Ethics, 1061) This friendship goes beyond pleasure or benefiting from one another, meaning it will last as long as each man is good for one another.
Though some may disagree, these three categories do fit in today’s society. As we talked about in class, we all have different categories that we classify our friends in. We have the best friends, the work friends, the classroom friends, etc. The point that Aristotle is making and the discussion we had in class is; it is good to have different types of friends but not all of them should be considered true friends.
People often argue that there friend from the third grade is still a true friend because that person will always be there for you, but is that friend really always there for you when you never see that friend or talk to that friend? “…when the motive of the friendship is done away, the friendship is dissolved, inasmuch as it existed only for the ends in question.” (Ethics, 1060) Aristotle uses people who are young as an example of this type of friendship, that doesn’t last. This is why a lot of younger people are in denial that the friends they have now will always be their friends. In the end, a true friend is someone who is like you and you two benefit from each other, not someone you grew up with.
As a future law school student next fall, this article made me extremely angry, and reminded me of why I want to attend law school in the first place. If you have read any of my past blog posts (which I’ll be extremely sad if you haven’t), I mostly write about justice rather than heroism or the good life. That’s because I truly believe justice is what all people, regardless of whatever background they may have, deserve. As a person who loves justice, I understand the importance of the writ of habeas corpus. As we have obviously seen in history (Central Park Five, anyone?), court cases can be wrong. That’s why we need a check in order to ensure our justice system is doing it’s job. Habeas corpus serves as one way to check the court system. However, when lawyers miss appeal deadlines, the grunt of the missed deadline falls upon their clients, those who have to suffer the consequences of a failed or not-granted appeal. What is even more disturbing is that the lawyers who fail with habeas corpus deadlines are often not held accountable for their actions. Out of 80 capital cases in which the lawyers missed their deadlines, as the article states, “Among the dozens of attorneys who have borne some responsibility for those mistakes, only one has been sanctioned by a professional disciplinary body for missing the deadline.” It’s truly unjust to diminish someone’s chance for an appeal just because a lawyer was unaware of a due date for an appeal filing. That’s what one aspect of a lawyers job is- to complete the filings by the set due date, regardless of whom the client is. The ending of the article gives me hope that this is a trend that will discontinue, as there are major reforms happening to adjust how habeas corpus appeals are filed and by whom. This is a great step our justice system is taking to correct its wrongs.
This article is an example of how unfair it is to the prisoners who have lawyers that fail with habeas corpus deadlines and have not have been held accountable for their actions. I think that there are a lot of problems with the death penalty around the country and that it is a huge deal that lawyers have missed habeas corpus deadlines. This article is a good example of who is given a fair trial and who isn’t. Everyone is supposed to have a fair trial but it seems that the lawyers like Mary Bonner, have other issues going on. The article gives two examples in which Bonner failed to file her clients’ habeas petitions on time. Stating that she was a “very, very diligent practitioner” and then confused with her other case, claiming her files had been destroyed in a hurricane. The article goes more in depth with more cases she missed in later years. Since major reforms are happening to adjust how habeas corpus appeals are filed, I agree that it is a great step to our justice system. The lawyers who missed their deadlines should be accountable for their actions. It shouldn’t be the prisoner alone who suffers the consequences due to the mistakes their attorneys have made.
The West Virginia University freshman who was found unconscious and not breathing inside a fraternity house — leading to a suspension of all Greek activities...
After Nolan Burch was found unconscious and ended up dying, West Virginia University made the decision to suspend all Greek organizations affiliated with the University. They are investing what happened to Nolan Burch but I think what triggered the University to suspend all Greek organizations was due to another frat getting in trouble the week before for underage drinking on their campus.
There are two sides to this story, first, it is not fair that all the Greek organizations are suspended and the one frat should be punished but not all of them. There are a lot of positive outcomes to being a part of a Greek organization. Or, the way the fraternity behaved was unjust and the University wants to prevent accidents like this from happening again. It is not fair to Burch’s family that he died at such at 18 from a catastrophe. It’s not what supposed to happen when you go off to college. They mentioned other cases of pledges who have died on other campuses and are doing researching as to what 'dangerous' things they are doing to cause these incidents.
This article and newly published letter reinforce my conception of Martin Luther King, Jr. as a hero. Dr. King took extraordinary action to stand up for a just cause, and this letter provides another insight into the extreme adversity that he faced and persevered through. Not only did his heroism eventually cost him his life, but Dr. King was also subject to the harassment of the extremely powerful F.B.I. This is not to say that Dr. King was some sort of infallible person, which he was definitely not, but instead that he simply took an admirable action to stand up for others at great cost to himself.
This is an interesting article about MLK and what he went through when he was alive. Threatening MLK with his sex life and suggesting that he kill himself shows that what the FBI wanted to prove, failed. In the article it says that the FBI began to pass the information along about MLK’s hotel-room activities to the press, hoping to discredit him. MLK is a hero because he simply took the action to stand up for others at great cost to himself, his life. MLK represented equality and fairness because he knew fighting against segregation was the right thing to do. While most people were wrong in the situation, MLK was not. This letter is just one letter that was sent to him. What makes this letter different from other letters is that it was sent by the FBI and King knew himself that the FBI sent him this letter. MLK represents a hero and this article gives examples of injustice and unfairness that MLK went through while fighting for equality.
Michael McAdoo has filed a class-action lawsuit over fake classes at North Carolina and claims players were cheated out of a legitimate education.
Michael McAdoo is seeking justice against his former University at North Carolina. The football athlete was promised a proper education from the University but was kicked off of the football team in 2010. A judge dismissed McAdoo’s lawsuit after McAdoo was accused of having a tutor do improper work. Now the scandal has reached federal court, claiming that the University broke its promise to legitimately educate football players in exchange to play for the Tar Heels team.
The article says that football players "were urged" to consider only Exercise Sport Science, Communication or African-American Studies. Even though McAdoo was interested in Criminal Justice, and African-American Studies is the department where the easy classes occurred with little to no work required while grading was handled by a non-faculty member. Also, the advisor said that "you can fail one course per semester and still be NCAA eligible."
McAdoo is seeking justice against his former University because he feels that it was not fair that he was released from the football team in 2010. He also feels that the University should have done a better job at advising students instead suggesting “easy” majors or saying that you can fail one course per semester and you’ll still be NCAA eligible. The article claims McAdoo questioned his enrollment, wanting to take more challenging courses but the football coaches advised him not to.
Women and Children
In the beginning of book V in The Republic, Socrates argues that men and women should be equal individuals. Though Socrates tried to avoid his view on women and children he was “arrested” into presenting his view. Polemarchus and Adeimantues claim that Socrates is taking the easy way out. After Glaucon and Thrasymachus chime in their vote, Socrates agrees to discuss his argument on equality of women and children even though he feels that it is taking away time.
I found Book V interesting because of how Socrates compares women to men is still relevant in today’s society. Though Socrates points out that women and men should have equal education, that doesn’t mean he thought every woman was capable of being as smart as a man or better yet a philosopher. Women have come a long way but there is still inequality today. The perception that there is always a stronger or better man is still a common argument today.
Socrates points out that men and women can have still the same nature. Socrates argues that though women and men may have the same nature, men are naturally stronger than women. Although some women may be better than some men, there will always be a better man. “Therefore, my friend, there is no practice of a city’s governors which belongs to woman because she’s woman, or to man because he’s man; but the natures are scattered alike among both animals; and woman participates according to nature is all practices, and man in all, but in all of them woman is weaker,” (455c). By nature, men may be stronger than women but that doesn’t conclude mean that there will always be a better man compared to every woman. In the workforce men are still paid more than a woman for doing the exact same job.
However, since most Greek women were not allowed to have any role in their Society, Socrates’ idea that men and women should have the same equal opportunities seemed absurd to Glaucon. Most women were to stay at home and run their household. Occasionally they were allowed to leave in events like funerals or weddings. Even though Socrates claims that men are naturally stronger and there will always be a better man than woman at something, he still believes that men and women should be given the same equal tasks.
Focusing on Socrates’ next view, which is his argument on fairness and equality of the children, Socrates has an interesting concept/idea. “All these women are to belong to all these men in common, and no woman is to live privately with any man. And the children, in their turn, will be in common, and neither will a parent know his off-spring nor a child his parent,” (457d). Socrates suggests that men from a young-adult age to fifty-five and women from twenty to forty years old guardians reproduce in only festivals. By doing this, the offspring will have no idea who their real parents are and their best interest will be in the city. Socrates uses the guardian species because it will remain pure and there is a need for the best men to have intercourse with the best women and same with ordinary men and women.
The argument against Socrates view on how to reproduce children can be unequal, considering he divides the men and women to their class. Why can only the guardians breed within each other? Does that actually lead to a stronger outcome of children? Socrates makes these arguments about men, women, and children but could anyone actually live like this? “Do you accept the community of the women with the men in education, children, and guarding the rest of the citizens; and that both when they are staying the city and going out to war, they must guard and hunt together like dogs, that in doing this they’ll do what’s best and nothing contrary to the nature of the female in her with the male, nothing contrary to the natural community of the two with each other,” (466c). No man or woman could live without a family and romance. Socrates doesn’t think family or romance is important. The only thing Socrates thinks is important is intelligence. To Socrates the only concern men and women should have should be focused around the community and what is best for the city.
Although Socrates’ view on women is equal for Ancient Greek society, it wasn’t realistic. Women did not have many rights therefore Socrates’ argument that women should be equal to men in opportunities like education would not be realistic during that time. The same goes for reproducing children but not having a family or a significant other. Too many Greeks have other interests than being intelligent.
After a middle-aged slump, most folks in the U.S. and other wealthy countries report greater happiness. But in less well-off nations, people report a sharp, never-ending decline in satisfaction.
Living a good life into one’s later years is an issue that is rarely discussed but is especially important as the United States and other countries experience aging among large swaths of their populations. The study this article references showed that one cannot live a good life without the help of others, especially into old age when people become more dependent on society. This seems to reinforce the idea that it is important to help out the elderly in society when one is a young person, as this specific aspect of living a good life is important to be able to benefit from as one ages. Because countries that have more of a culture of caring for the elderly have greater happiness outcomes, it is part of living a good life to make sure to care for the older segments of the population.
I’m not surprised with the outcome of satisfactions in this article, especially in the wealthy countries like the U.S. and Sub-Saharan Africa, where low levels of satisfaction begin at a young age. Poor health leads to lower life satisfaction. It is important to reinforce the idea to help the elderly when you area younger person. I agree somewhat with what the article says about the perception of how people in the United States treat elders. The article claims that other people in different countries treat elders better than Americans do. It seems that a lot of people (younger) do not respect their elders as much as they should. Americans turn to nursing homes and assisted living to take care of their parents because they are too busy or it is too much work. I think that other countries have more of a culture for caring to the elderly, which results to greater happiness and living a good life. In the end like you said, a person cannot live a good life without the help of others, especially into old age.
Decontee Davis survived Ebola, but her fiance died of the virus. Now she is working with children whose parents have had the disease — and spreading the word that early treatment is critical.
I wanted to share this article I read the other day about Decontee Davis, who is an Ebola survivor. Recently, our class has discussed the heroic doctors and nurses that have gone to Africa to help fight Ebola. They are heroes because they are doing something that they don’t have to do and they are risking their lives to help others. After losing her fiancé to Ebola, her son having a fever, and fighting Ebola herself, Decontee Davis is a hero to me. Not because she’s overcome Ebola but because she has decided to help the children whose parents have Ebola and they the kids who are at high risk for the disease. At the end of the article she says “my advice to the nation is early treatment saves life.” Even though the kids are at high risk and she has had Ebola, she is still helping her community fight and overcome Ebola.
Instead of worrying about herself and that she is jut healthy, Davis decided to work with children whose parents have Ebola, though Ebola survivors are still immune to the strain of virus for a period of time. After suffering and thinking she was going to die from Ebola, she is still risking her life to help/work with children and to encourage victims of Ebola to get treatment as soon as possible.
Juana Villegas on track for permanent residency six years after she was arrested on immigration charges by Tennessee police
Welcome to America! The land where we shackle non-violent, non-offending illegal immigrants while they are giving birth, and cut off any contact with their family! Now, doesn’t that make a good motto?
In 2008, pregnant Juana Villegas was pulled over in Nashville, Tennessee with her three children in the car. Villegas, an illegal immigrant, did not have a driver’s license, and due to the then-intact 287(g) deportation program, they were able to arrest Villegas for her lack of identification. The cops then told Villegas to kiss her children goodbye, since she was going to jail… you know, the always correct thing to say to a mother in that situation. After two days of detainment, Villegas went into labor. Villegas was forced to give birth handcuffed to a bed with her legs restrained. She was also not allowed to call her husband or other family and friends. Because nothing says justice like handcuffing a pregnant woman, and not allowing her to contact any of her family. It makes our justice system sound like an abusive husband, rather than a system that was created to protect residents of the U.S.
Now, the good news out of all of this situation is that Villegas was granted a U-visa, which are for those who are victims of crimes, regardless if they are a citizen or not, after filing a lawsuit, which she won.
This is a perfect example of a justice system that is not just. Non-violent perpetrators should not be treated as if they are hard-core criminals. If this is the way the U.S. is deciding to treat pregnant illegal aliens, it’s time for a major re-haul of the system, or else there will be many more lawsuits that will occur.
I agree, this is one example of how our justice system is not just. Even though she did not have identification, the fact that our law enforcement told Villegas to “kiss her children goodbye” is not professional. Even worse, having to give birth handcuffed to a bed with her legs restrained? What? Whether it was Villegas, or some other woman who committed a crime, no woman should be treated the way she was. I cannot believe they made a woman give birth handcuffed to a bed, her legs restrained, and not able to call any family members. Villegas didn’t commit a serious crime. Like you stated, she should not have been treated as a hard-core criminal. Regardless of if a woman is a hard-core criminal or not, I don’t think a pregnant woman should have to go through what Villegas went through. If Villegas was in jail for second degree murder, I still would say it is not fair what she had to go through while giving birth. Did they think she was going try and “escape” while giving birth?
Also, I agree, we need to re-evaluate our system if this his how we treat pregnant women who are in jail. It did say at the end of the article that Davidson County has stopped participating in the 287(g) program. It says that in 2008 they enacted a policy that prohibits officers from shackling pregnant women. Which is unfortunate that they needed to enact a policy to make sure officers do not shack pregnant women, when this issue shouldn’t have occurred in the first place.
A high school homecoming prince in Washington state calmly opened fire in the school cafeteria at lunchtime, killing one person and injuring four others - including two of his relatives - before shooting himself to death, police and witnesses said.
Another school shooting happened in the cafeteria at Marysville-Pilchuck High School. 14 year old Jaylen Fryberg, killed one person and injured four other people, including two of his relatives and himself.
Despite the fact that the 14 year old had a weapon, I think that public schools need to take action when it comes to the security and safety of schools. I know that some public schools (middle and high schools) have metal detectors in every entrance of their school for safety purposes. Though students would complain, it could be a possibility to make the school a safe environment. Public schools need to do something to make their schools as safe as possible. On another note, Fryberg shouldn’t have had access to a gun/weapon. School shootings will keep occurring, if we cannot control who has access to a gun.
This, I would argue, is not the solution to the problem of spree shootings. I’ve outlined in other posts my ideas for gun control, and although there is no reason that a 14-year-old should have access to guns, I would argue that the problem (and the obligation) lies with the school and, more generally, with how we handle mental health issues in this country.
No normal person does this. The article states that he was methodical, calculating. Most murders aren’t like this; most murders are acts of passion. This kid, in my opinion, had clear mental health issues. The article also mentions that he got in an argument the day before over racial slurs. While controlling his access to weapons was obviously needed, also needed was proper assessment and care for mental health concerns in this country.
So how do we achieve justice in this situation? I propose two ways: 1) Treating mental health concerns as just that - health concerns and 2) Criminalizing the availability of weapons to minors. We’re going to keep experiencing these shootings until we fix these underlying issues.
As I’ve previously talked about in one of my posts, I do think mental illness is a factor when it comes to murders; my example was Nikko Jenkins and how they shouldn’t have released him. It is easier said than done to say that we should criminalize the availability of weapons to minors when so many people illegally own weapons. Unfortunately almost anyone can get a gun due to connections, even though it is illegal. I’m not saying it isn’t a problem, I do think we need to be more strict on who and who cannot own have the rights to a gun but clearly school shootings are still a huge problem. That is why I suggested that schools look at the alternative of putting metal detectors in their schools. Or perhaps figure out another way to make their school safer. The fact that the 14-year old kid had a weapon in the cafeteria shows to me that the safety of the school needs to be re-evaluated. If schools don’t take any action on trying to make a safer environment for their students, then more and more school shootings will occur. It is not fair to parents are children that they can’t go to school without worrying about their well-being. Schools used to be considered a safety-zone and now they are becoming more of a primary target for shootings. These school shootings are unjust and unfair to the community and environment. The high school students shouldn’t have been killed/wounded.
A high school homecoming prince in Washington state calmly opened fire in the school cafeteria at lunchtime, killing one person and injuring four others - including two of his relatives - before shooting himself to death, police and witnesses said.
Another school shooting happened in the cafeteria at Marysville-Pilchuck High School. 14 year old Jaylen Fryberg, killed one person and injured four other people, including two of his relatives and himself.
Despite the fact that the 14 year old had a weapon, I think that public schools need to take action when it comes to the security and safety of schools. I know that some public schools (middle and high schools) have metal detectors in every entrance of their school for safety purposes. Though students would complain, it could be a possibility to make the school a safe environment. Public schools need to do something to make their schools as safe as possible. On another note, Fryberg shouldn’t have had access to a gun/weapon. School shootings will keep occurring, if we cannot control who has access to a gun.
School has always been considered a safety zone for students. It is supposed to be a safe environment. I gave the idea to put metal detectors in schools as an example of protecting the students, teachers, staff members, parents, etc. There has been an increasing amount of shootings at school and innocent who have been shot, wounded, and killed. Parents shouldn't have to worry about their children at school and whether they are going to be a victim in a school shooting. It isn't fair the children who have to worry about what will happen in their school environment, especially if it is a school that has already had a shooting. Overall, it is unjust for someone to use a school as a place to get revenge and injuring/killing students, teachers, etc.