After a terrorist attack that led to the death of 14, the FBI managed to get ahold of Syed Rizwan Farook's Iphone 5c. Sadly, they were not able to get the passcode out of him before he was killed. Now, they are demanding that Apple create something that allows them to get inside of his phone and search through everything he has stored in it. Apple declined because they stated that we have no idea how bad it could get if that capability were to get into the wrong person's hands. They were ordered to by a federal magistrate. I believe that they should do it solely for this one time purpose and then find a way to get rid of it to not let it get into the wrong hands.
I agree with you Brittney, however, I fee that a line needs to be drawn as to what they are looking for. For example, it is a good idea because we can find more information about the shootings and the killer. But it is unnecessary for the FBI to go searching for more interesting things about Farook's life. I also agree with Mrs. McDermott when she said earlier, she feels Apple is being stubborn with the issue because it is bringing more media to them and it tells their costumers that they care about your privacy.
(Dang it, I did not see you also wrote about this topic before I posted mine)
I do not really agree, I understand that in helping the fbi in catching a terrorist but, it can't just be a one time thing. It would have to be some sort of software update to get encryption of a device. Plus I remember it stating that after they tried to guess the password(brute force it) it encrypted itself. Now, to get past a encryption you need a encryption key to unencrypt it, which sounds more simpler than it actually is. Apple would (if they agreed) have to give this encryption key to the fbi, which would allow them to do this to ALL devices that have that type of encryption, this could affect not only apple but multiple other companies and corporations. Now if that key somehow got out into the public or by malicious people, it would mean leaked information everywhere.(kind of worse case scenario but could happen) Though I do agree with Curtiss shore with them being stubborn about this, it kind of weirdly puts Apple in a good light in terms of customer privacy which seems like a side effect of this whole thing.
I agree with Brittney. This terrorist waived any rights to privacy when he decided to kill over a dozen people. I understand where Apple is coming from, though, so I think that a line needs to be drawn of how this method of searching can be used in the future. We don't want the government to have too much control over tech companies and be able to see all of our personal data, but this is a matter of national security. If this man had the numbers of other terrorists, information on ISIS, etc, then we need to do whatever we can do to get that information out of him.
This is an article about Trump wanting to open up the phones of the shooters. I agree that these people did a horrible thing, however since apple CEO Tim Cook says that this concerns the safety of all their users, we need to be more cautious. I feel that for once in my life I agree with Trump. I feel that opening the phone would allow for more evidence to be found out like others involved, a reason behind the attack. Or even future attacks that can be stopped in the future.
This article is about how President Obama has decided not to attend the funeral of Supreme Court Justice Scalia. He will though be paying his respects when Scalia's body will lie in repose at the court. President Obama has even spoken of Scalia, never saying a bad thing. The writer of this article said that Obama's decision makes no sense and that it is a bad political move. I feel as though there is a reason behind why the President is deciding not to go, deeper than what is seems.
Personally I think Obama should attend or have attended Scalia's funeral. To me,it is his responsibility to show how great this person is and how they need to be remembered. Not going to his funeral will give many people the impression that Obama never cared about him and that no one else should.
This article talks about how many young democratic voters prefer Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton and why that is. When describing the candidates to their father, three young voters described Sanders as more authentic than Clinton and that they felt like Sanders was more trustworthy. Interestingly, all three describe themselves as feminists, including the two boys, and none of them are moved that Clinton would be the first female president if elected. Many other young feminists find this to be true as well. That's basically it. I thought this would help me understand why younger people like Sanders other than free college, but that is not the case. Oh well, Sanders or Clinton, who would you vote for?
This is something I have been wondering for a while. I took an online political quiz to see which candidates my views lined up with and my views for Clinton and Sanders were basically lined up the exact same so I don't know why it seems that so many people prefer Sanders over Clinton. Maybe it's the free college, or maybe just hate for Clinton as a person.
Well Ethan, allow me to answer that question as best as I can. Seeing as I am an avid supporter of Bernie Sanders, and I, as a young soon to be voter, intend on voting for Mr. Sanders when the primaries come to town, I feel that i probably should give an explanation as to what I see In Bernie so that you can better understand why the youth of this nation overwhelmingly supports him compared to Hillary. When I initially looked into both candidates to see which one i supported, I really looked into their stances on the issues and their track records when it came to voting,and what they fought for. I saw some great things when it came to what Hillary stood for, especially in regards to women and children, and she certainly has plenty of experience when it comes to politics, serving as first lady, senator, and secretary of state. But when i looked into what Bernie stood for, i was drawn in by his track record, His history fighting for civil rights in the 1960's,(if you want more info on this, there are pictures and a video showing a young Bernie being arrested at a civil rights protest), His fighting for gay marriage in the 1980's, and even his fight against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000's, wars that are now seen as a blunder on our foreign policy and have lead to further instability in the middle east. These issues that he fought for all those years ago, he still fights for today, which really adds to his honesty and integrity.Which is another reason I support him, like most have mentioned, I see him as a very honest man, when i hear him talk about his vision of america, what he wants to implement as president, I genuinely believe that he will really fight for what he promises, and do everything that he can to implement his vision as best as he can. And i'm sure that he will get what he says done, at least to the best of his ability, seeing as he was one of America's best mayors when he was mayor of Burlington Vermont, and especially when he was elected into the senate, He has gotten more amendments passed, very "socialist" amendments mind you, in a republican congress than any other senator has, which really shows that he is practical, and can get things done if he wins the presidency. Well, I hope that answered your question and helped you to understand why many young people, including myself, support Bernie Sanders for President.
I can definitely see why the younger voters would be going for Sanders. He's appealing to their interests in a big way. But, I can never mention enough that another reason might be that they have learned all they could about Clinton's stunt that she pulled with the secret emails. So of course they would call Bernie more trustworthy, because he truly is.
This article is about how Apple is refusing to unlock a terrorist's iPhone because they are afraid that creating this new software could potentially lead to unlocking millions of iPhones. Their worry isn't with the government using the new software, Apple is afraid that hackers and cyber thieves. I understand where Apple is coming from, but I feel like if they could potentially find an ally to this terrorist or even help the government to better understand the attack, Apple should have to do it.
This article is all about how the CIA is putting in efforts to begin recruiting transgender candidates. The CIA is also beginning to recruit more candidates from various races, sexualaties, and backgrounds. I think that this is a great idea, and honestly I'm not sure why is has taken so long for this to be put into place. It is unfair to discriminate against people because they may be gay, Hispanic, disabled, or anything like that. Everyone should be given a fair chance for any job. I'm not saying these people should be hired just because of their diversity, but they shouldn't be excluded from any opportunity.
I agree with you Taylor. It's nice that we're moving in the right direction when it comes to diversity. Including different races and people of all shapes and sizes and sexualities into the CIA really sets an example especially as a very prestigious American organization.
This article is about the death of one of the greatest writers in the past 80 years. Harper Lee, the author of To Kill Mockingbird has died at the age of 89. Some don't know how creative and passionate one is about their work and what they do. Truly a gifted writer, and her achievements are well deserved. I read To Kill A Mockingbird last year for the first time, and man was I blown away. She was truly ahead of her time and deserved every bit the praise she got from that book. It is truly sad her being gone, it reminds me that everyone has their time and no one lives forever. But what I do know is that her achievements and contributions will live on forever.
You know I dont belive in religion and I try to avoid politics most times but I just have to say it is very disrespectful to question someones faith, I dont care if your god o'mighty it is very disrespectful and the pope question trump is disrespectful. No matter who you are you don't have to defend your religion.
Damarco HambyFebruary 19, 2016 at 7:59 AM http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/02/harper_lee_dead_at_age_of_89_t.html
Reply-I read her book To Kill A Mockingbird it was a amazing book in every aspect. Her death legacy will live on through out us book readers for her amazing books. Death cant be avoided for ever but what we do in our life time will live on for years to come All my respect goes to Harper Lee
Republicans once again prove they only care abut partisanship rather than running the country. They would never dare claim a Republican president should not nominate a justice to SCOTUS. Furthermore, the Constitution says the PRESIDENT has the right to nominate federal judges. There's nowhere that says only if he is a Republican. It's rather ironic that Republicans are defying the Constitution with their absurd claims of "precedent" of a president not nominating anyone in their last year in office when Scalia was an originalist. Scalia interpreted the Constitution very literally, and the Constitution is quite clear about who nominates justices. Moreover, their beloved former president Reagan nominated and confirmed a justice in his final year in office. What's even worse, they view it as a surrender if they allow President Obama to exercise his Constitutional right. This proves to me Republicans are hypocrites and do not care about compromise. No, they're only interested in furthering the interests of their Republican constituents rather than the whole country. They are the main culprits in this age of polarization.
It's not just a one time thing though. This could lead to the loss of privacy for all iPhone users. Also, we can't give up all our rights in the name of safety. Privacy is an essential freedom, especially in this digital age. If we give up this right, what will we give up next? I don't want to live in a police state. The FBI has undoubtedly saved us from terrorist attacks without needing to monitor us so closely. I am glad Apple is taking a stand for our civil liberties.
This article is about how Russia plans to modify some of its intercontinental ballistic missiles to destroy asteroids before they hit Earth, according to a top Russian rocket researcher.The Russian missiles would be used to target smaller asteroids of 20 meters to 50 meters in diameter. But the U.S. is taking another approach by instead of blowing up the space rocks, NASA plans to shove them away from the planet. Which sounds way better then using missiles because they can use that as cover and also shoving things over without the use of weapons.
This is kind of good news but coming from a bad way. The fact that the fbi ask Apple to do something to their phones so they can get access to the information, then them saying no in response. Though, it is good that Apple is thinking about the potential consequences that could arise if they DID follow the fbi's request. If they agreed to their request and added a software update to make iphones have a intentional security risk so that the government can access terrorist's information. That would endanger everyone that updates to that version, you would(if you have a iphone)have a massive breach in security that not only the government can use, but ANYONE that finds out about that breach. In that breach they can have any information on a iphone, last calls, contacts, downloads, everything. Having something like may help the fbi in catching terrorist, however, it can harm more than it helps.
This article is about immigration and all the misconceptions about it. I agree with this article that the government doesn't focus enough on fixing its borders and the system in which immigrants have to go through to travel legally. The government focuses on deporting people who's only intentions are to better their lives. The article also says that people like Donald Trump are trying to turn back time and make the United States a white America again and that's unrealistic. We have to focus on working with what we have. Lastly the article corrected many misconceptions about immigration such as that it's increasing but it's actually been decreasing and more immigrants are leaving than are coming in
This article is about using drones to carry out tasks instead of risking the lives of U.S. soldiers. Accuracy and precision are calculated by analysts. Critics say that civilians account for a high percentage of people killed in drone strikes. The author writes, “The program is not perfect. No military program is. But here is the bottom line: It works.” While the program does work, I’m not sure that it’s fair to put innocent people’s lives at risk. I think they should find a way to increase the accuracy.
This article is about singer Kesha losing a battle against music producer Dr. Luke in a New York courtroom today. She claims the Dr. Luke drugged her and sexually abused her. She also claims that he psychologically abused her leading her to develop an eating disorder and suicidal thoughts which led to two months in rehabilitation. Dr. Luke claims that she’s trying to make him look bad to get out of her contract. Supreme Court Justice Shirley Kornreich says Kesha “is being given the opportunity to record.” I don’t think being given the opportunity to record justifies what Kesha went through and she shouldn’t have to work with Dr. Luke anymore. There is a reason why she doesn’t feel comfortable working with him and I think the court should try harder to see that instead of ignoring her claims.
This is very heart wrenching to hear, but unfortunately is very common especially in the Hollywood business. Kesha seemed to have gotten cheated out and deserved to be heard instead of just being happy of getting an opportunity to record.
This is very sad to hear. I feel that the moral obligations should have been enough to undo the contract. I dont know if the rape charges would have done anything because there was no concrete evidence but there at least should have destroyed to the contract to terminate the toxic relationship.
This article is written by by an attorney a Uganda human rights activist named Nicholas Opiyo. He describes the current election cycle going on in the country, which is filled with dangerous ideologies and attitudes toward the LGBT+ community. Uganda has always had extremely and explicitly anti-gay legislation, but progress is being made. In 2014, one of their most oppressive laws toward these people was overturned. "However," as Opiyo states in the article, "the government still makes use of several other legal avenues that allow it to punish and silence people whose sexual identity is out of public favor." One example of anti-gay behavior can be found in the current presidential race. One of the candidates discredited one of the other candidates and urged voters to stop supporting him because he support gay rights. The public opinion on gays in Uganda is extremely negative. Roughly 92% feel that is is not consistent with Ugandan culture and religion and do not deserve the same constitutional rights as their heterosexual counterparts. The question now becomes what we can do and whether or not we should get involved. I feel that Americans should definitely be getting involved here. The problems of those people today have been the problems of gay Americans for centuries. It is time that people stand up for what is right and protect the rights of all people. These homophobic bullies have no right to value one life over another, especially when being gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc is not a choice. We need to have American politicians and interest groups meet with the Ugandans to help them reach some sort of resolution. Also, we should be encouraging pro-gay Ugandan groups and urging them to speak up for the topic in an attempt to gain public support.
http://cnn.it/1RHhCww This article is about how it might be the end of the era of ads and different things that went wrong with some of the presidential candidates’ ads. I don't think the era of ads is coming to an end anytime soon, ads are so common and a good way for voters to get informed, or at least recognize the candidates’ names. The article talked about how Cruz pulled one of his ads because people find out one of the actresses used to play some R rated roles, and how that was a missed opportunity to appeal to less likely republicans if he didn't get rid of it. I agree because most people think that republicans are all rich white men and that's not the case and this couldn't shown that, however I understand why he did it because it could have created a lot of unnecessary scandal.
I agree that ad will not be coming to an end anytime soon. Ads have been around forever and probably will be around forever just change the way they are sent out to the public to view.
This article argues that method of execution in which death row inmates are electrocuted should be completely banned. This argument comes after Virginians try to revive the method of execution. On one side, it is an extremely painful and arguably cruel way to be killed. There are much simpler and painless ways of being executed. On the other hand, it is one of the cheapest ways to execute criminals and has been done for several years. I personally think that the electric chair should be an option for execution. One may argue that it is an extremely cruel and painful way for someone to be killed. This is true, but I don't think that matters. Criminals who are on death row are there for a reason. They have likely caused extreme harm to several people (their victim(s) and their victims' families). In my opinion, when you commit a crime that is bad enough to land you on death row, you waive any rights that you have. The death penalty is not a good thing, but it is needed. It has been shown that most criminals can NOT be rehabilitated. Oftentimes felons who leave jail will end up committing another crime. Lethal injections are a much more humane way to die, but the price for these is extremely expensive. I don't think that we should be paying so much in tax dollars so that murders and rapists can have an easy way to go out.
This past year has been hard on the oil companies around the world. A company called Schlumberger lost 20% of their workforce which lead to less money but really? The CEO of this company made a heaping 18 million dollars from all of the workers being laid off and the money left over from it. In my opinion is okay because this is just standard business and what happens happens. Overall the CEO is the top dog of the company so he naturally will get the most,
“ These unpledged delegates make up 30 percent of the 2,382 delegates whose votes are needed to win the nomination, and could thus make all the difference.”. There is always a risk thatcher delegate will not vote in the way that is being represented in constituents wishes and views. It's one of the negatives in the system . But then you thnk about it , it could be in a way , a good. Unfaithful deluges might actually be helping and allowing for the best candidate to be the one in office … Which is totally against American values , since it would be putting the decision at only the hands of a certain exclusive group. Bernie us worried about his votes going to Hilary. Both democrats have their flaws and strength buy hopefully it works out for them .
“ I am sorry to note that Donald Trump no longer seems to be at war with the pope.” as can be seen, this article completely trashes Trump. Yet it point out some veg interesting points. He obviously has political strength because he is still in the race yet there has been much attention on his lack to properly respond questions. He will act like he forgets or bring something new up. trump has sister, trump Barry in the court of appeals. Trump commented that she would make arrest chief justice and Cruz saw an opportunity to call her because she lead a movement against abortion . Obviously Trump has a freedom of speech but sometimes he doesn't use it to obtain the most positive response within many communities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/opinion/why-apple-is-right-to-challenge-an-order-to-help-the-fbi.html?ref=opinion This article was about the FBI ordering Apple to unlock one of the shooters from the December San Bernardino shooting, and how Apple has been denying the right. They are claiming it is unconstitutional and that unlocking one to find info will lead to opening multiple. I agree with Apple on not letting the FBI get into the shooters phone. For one, they would probably go beyond the "invading privacy" ; and for two, the shooters and shooting is over, there is no real reason to search their phones. All of their evidence is right of them, and the FBI does not need to invade people's Iphones.
Earlier, I didn't understand this situation and I thought that Apple would just be unlocking the one phone and the FBI wasn't very involved in the unlocking process. Now (I think this is right but I'm not sure), I've come to understand that the encryption code would be given to the FBI and would somehow apply to every iPhone that the FBI received. Also, some new information surfaced that the FBI had previously changed the pass-code on the iPhone while it was in their possession. Now, I think the FBI just wants the encryption code to be used in any other "suspicious" phones instead of for the concern of safety.
This opinion editorial was discussing Mitch McConnell's opinion on Justice Scalia's death and replacement. McConnell is the majority (republican) leader in the Senate. Within an hour of the death, McConnell announced that there would be little to no attempt for the Senate to support any nomination for a new Supreme Court Justice. There are records of other small outbursts from McConnell but none of them were public in order to keep McConnell in good standing for reelection. I think McConnell was a little to quick and harsh in his reaction. Kasich, lately, has been saying there needs to be more time for recovery instead of jumping right into politics after a tragedy. I agree with him 100%. Not everything needs to be an immediate battle. Another interesting aspect of this editorial was it's mention of the changing political perspective in Washington. The officials have to change their values very often in order to remain popular in elections. This reminded me of primaries versus the general election. Very extreme left or right candidates must bring their ideas towards the center in order to win over more voters.
With the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, many people in this nation are thinking about the legacy that he left behind, and especially if his spot on the supreme court will be replaced, those on the Democratic side are quick to point out that President Obama has the constitutionally given power to nominate a justice, while republicans believe that the nomination process should be held off until a new president is chosen. The real debate lies with whether or not this process could, or should, be delayed. This is the true debate when it comes to the nomination of a new justice, The supreme court can still function, albeit with some differences when it comes to even splits, so depending on one's point of view, the nomination of a justice might be important to stop such splits from occurring. But if Obama nominates a new justice, it may prove unfavorable to the republican ideology of this nation, then again, he must nominate a justice with senate approval, so that issue may be relieved, yet it may not as well. It's definitely an interesting story to follow, and i think we all are interested as to how this story will end.
This article is about why the polls used to predict the Nevada Caucuses are unreliable compared to the polls used to predict the other primaries and caucuses. The Nevada caucus is new, having started in 2004, and the population of the state is still unfamiliar with how the process works, so many of the voters don't turn out for it and do not correctly answer if they will or will not when polled. The volatility of the nature of money and business based around the large economy of gambling in the state also results in a high population turnaround rate compared to other states, so many numbers still listed in directories no longer have owners that live in Nevada. The state also has a large population of Union workers that work nights and cannot answer the phone for polls conducted in the evening, and they may also not be able to attend the caucus itself.
Donald Trump makes another ridiculous request. It has been, and is becoming more hard, personally, to take this man seriously. In this article by Jeremy Diamond, he asks for a boycott of Apple, the company. He requests this as what could only be an attempt to show he “cares” about this country and is a man who takes action. The reason he gives, however, is in order to get the company to release information involving the iPhone that a San Bernardino shooter used. I think this is unconstitutional despite the evil of the person involved.
This article is a quick fact check on Ted Cruz's opinion of Donald Trump's and Rubio's opinions on same-sex marriage. He says that it is bad that republicans are "echoing" a democrats opinion and states that they are saying that since it is a "settled law" then we must follow it. He also says that he will only choose court justices who would overturn the court ruling on same-sex marriage. Trump says that he doesn't support it but will evolve to it and would consider electing court justices who might overturn it.
The issue that this article talks about is super delegates in the upcoming presidential election. Super delegates do not have to vote for the candidate with the most votes, or majority, and therefore, they can vote however they like. They are 30% of the vote, so they can impact the turnout. The article uses the example of the New Hampshire primary, where even though Bernie Sanders HAD the majority, Clinton still ended up "tying" with him because of this. There has been a recent movement to try and get super delegates to vote for the candidate who receives the popular vote. Because super delegates can switch sides at any moment, who they will pick is not known.
This article is about the death of Justice Scalia, and what impact he had on the court during his tenure. Scalia transformed the way the supreme court was run and executed, as pointed out by the article. Among his influences include the amount of questions asked by the justices, and the opinion writing of the court. I disagree with most of the opinions of Scalia, and think that in many things he was extremely backward and behind the times, but those dissenting opinions should be available on the bench. The supreme court should not be made up of likeminded and homogenous justices. They should come from all walks of life and all opinions of issues. As long as their opinions are rooted in their interpretation of the constitution and they have the experience to back up their career and the interpretations they have formed, they should be able to have their voice on the bench if the President and Congress approve.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/opinion/why-apple-is-right-to-challenge-an-order-to-help-the-fbi.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0 I totally agree with a pole in the decision to not help the FBI to help unlock the phone. Everyone who is at least informed of the situation knows this won't be a just one time thing. The government will keep their paranoia and continue to keep invading the privacy by defending themselves with the national security excuse. Plus there is no secure way of making sure that no one else uses the backdoor. Once its open anyone else with the skill all be able to hack into people phones to gain private info.
This goes back and forth between the question on how much power the government should have, and whether we should give up personal rights in order to have security, like at an airport, or with breathalyzers in cars, or anything else like this. This is where our political system is especially sketchy, some people are all for these terrorists' phones being hacked, but are against their own being hacked on the other hand. Ultimately, if the rights are writer, the they should be guaranteed to all, and what the FBI is trying to do is an invasion of privacy, and a violation of the constitution
It's crazy to think about just how much plays a role in politics. Body language isn't something that we all do consciously a lot of the time, but someone like Trump pays attention to it a lot. This article compares Trump's alpha male style and attitude to Mussolini, and JFK. It doesn't shock me that he is good at acting confident, after all he is a scheming, terrible human being.
This article is about how old a child should be before they are tried as an adult and how that age could lower crime. Connecticut and Illinois are considering raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction to 21 while New York and North Carolina are the only states where 16 year olds can be tried as adults. Research shows that raising the age in Connecticut and Illinois has lowered the amount of prisoners and the amount of youths being rearrested. I think the age depends on how serious the crime was.
I think this is another aspect of the government that is hard to make laws about. If you're going to try a 16 year old as an adult, why not go further and try a 12 or 10 year old as an adult? And what's the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old? There isn't a real cut off as to where the age should be. I think for now, that the age should remain at 18 years old, since people know from that point that they're responsible for their own actions and need to accept repercussions.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-apple-encryption-20160218-story.html#nt=oft07a-1gp1
ReplyDeleteAfter a terrorist attack that led to the death of 14, the FBI managed to get ahold of Syed Rizwan Farook's Iphone 5c. Sadly, they were not able to get the passcode out of him before he was killed. Now, they are demanding that Apple create something that allows them to get inside of his phone and search through everything he has stored in it. Apple declined because they stated that we have no idea how bad it could get if that capability were to get into the wrong person's hands. They were ordered to by a federal magistrate. I believe that they should do it solely for this one time purpose and then find a way to get rid of it to not let it get into the wrong hands.
I agree with you Brittney, however, I fee that a line needs to be drawn as to what they are looking for. For example, it is a good idea because we can find more information about the shootings and the killer. But it is unnecessary for the FBI to go searching for more interesting things about Farook's life. I also agree with Mrs. McDermott when she said earlier, she feels Apple is being stubborn with the issue because it is bringing more media to them and it tells their costumers that they care about your privacy.
Delete(Dang it, I did not see you also wrote about this topic before I posted mine)
DeleteI do not really agree, I understand that in helping the fbi in catching a terrorist but, it can't just be a one time thing. It would have to be some sort of software update to get encryption of a device. Plus I remember it stating that after they tried to guess the password(brute force it) it encrypted itself. Now, to get past a encryption you need a encryption key to unencrypt it, which sounds more simpler than it actually is. Apple would (if they agreed) have to give this encryption key to the fbi, which would allow them to do this to ALL devices that have that type of encryption, this could affect not only apple but multiple other companies and corporations. Now if that key somehow got out into the public or by malicious people, it would mean leaked information everywhere.(kind of worse case scenario but could happen)
Though I do agree with Curtiss shore with them being stubborn about this, it kind of weirdly puts Apple in a good light in terms of customer privacy which seems like a side effect of this whole thing.
I agree with Brittney. This terrorist waived any rights to privacy when he decided to kill over a dozen people. I understand where Apple is coming from, though, so I think that a line needs to be drawn of how this method of searching can be used in the future. We don't want the government to have too much control over tech companies and be able to see all of our personal data, but this is a matter of national security. If this man had the numbers of other terrorists, information on ISIS, etc, then we need to do whatever we can do to get that information out of him.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2016/02/17/politics/donald-trump-apple-encryption-debate/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis is an article about Trump wanting to open up the phones of the shooters. I agree that these people did a horrible thing, however since apple CEO Tim Cook says that this concerns the safety of all their users, we need to be more cautious. I feel that for once in my life I agree with Trump. I feel that opening the phone would allow for more evidence to be found out like others involved, a reason behind the attack. Or even future attacks that can be stopped in the future.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-obama-scalia-funeral-20160217-story.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how President Obama has decided not to attend the funeral of Supreme Court Justice Scalia. He will though be paying his respects when Scalia's body will lie in repose at the court. President Obama has even spoken of Scalia, never saying a bad thing. The writer of this article said that Obama's decision makes no sense and that it is a bad political move. I feel as though there is a reason behind why the President is deciding not to go, deeper than what is seems.
Personally I think Obama should attend or have attended Scalia's funeral. To me,it is his responsibility to show how great this person is and how they need to be remembered. Not going to his funeral will give many people the impression that Obama never cared about him and that no one else should.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/opinion/campaign-stops/politics-all-in-my-family.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about how many young democratic voters prefer Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton and why that is. When describing the candidates to their father, three young voters described Sanders as more authentic than Clinton and that they felt like Sanders was more trustworthy. Interestingly, all three describe themselves as feminists, including the two boys, and none of them are moved that Clinton would be the first female president if elected. Many other young feminists find this to be true as well. That's basically it. I thought this would help me understand why younger people like Sanders other than free college, but that is not the case. Oh well, Sanders or Clinton, who would you vote for?
This is something I have been wondering for a while. I took an online political quiz to see which candidates my views lined up with and my views for Clinton and Sanders were basically lined up the exact same so I don't know why it seems that so many people prefer Sanders over Clinton. Maybe it's the free college, or maybe just hate for Clinton as a person.
DeleteWell Ethan, allow me to answer that question as best as I can. Seeing as I am an avid supporter of Bernie Sanders, and I, as a young soon to be voter, intend on voting for Mr. Sanders when the primaries come to town, I feel that i probably should give an explanation as to what I see In Bernie so that you can better understand why the youth of this nation overwhelmingly supports him compared to Hillary. When I initially looked into both candidates to see which one i supported, I really looked into their stances on the issues and their track records when it came to voting,and what they fought for. I saw some great things when it came to what Hillary stood for, especially in regards to women and children, and she certainly has plenty of experience when it comes to politics, serving as first lady, senator, and secretary of state. But when i looked into what Bernie stood for, i was drawn in by his track record, His history fighting for civil rights in the 1960's,(if you want more info on this, there are pictures and a video showing a young Bernie being arrested at a civil rights protest), His fighting for gay marriage in the 1980's, and even his fight against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000's, wars that are now seen as a blunder on our foreign policy and have lead to further instability in the middle east. These issues that he fought for all those years ago, he still fights for today, which really adds to his honesty and integrity.Which is another reason I support him, like most have mentioned, I see him as a very honest man, when i hear him talk about his vision of america, what he wants to implement as president, I genuinely believe that he will really fight for what he promises, and do everything that he can to implement his vision as best as he can. And i'm sure that he will get what he says done, at least to the best of his ability, seeing as he was one of America's best mayors when he was mayor of Burlington Vermont, and especially when he was elected into the senate, He has gotten more amendments passed, very "socialist" amendments mind you, in a republican congress than any other senator has, which really shows that he is practical, and can get things done if he wins the presidency. Well, I hope that answered your question and helped you to understand why many young people, including myself, support Bernie Sanders for President.
DeleteI can definitely see why the younger voters would be going for Sanders. He's appealing to their interests in a big way. But, I can never mention enough that another reason might be that they have learned all they could about Clinton's stunt that she pulled with the secret emails. So of course they would call Bernie more trustworthy, because he truly is.
Deletehttp://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/18/apple-court-order-iphone-fbi-syed-farook-editorials-debates/80572492/
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how Apple is refusing to unlock a terrorist's iPhone because they are afraid that creating this new software could potentially lead to unlocking millions of iPhones. Their worry isn't with the government using the new software, Apple is afraid that hackers and cyber thieves. I understand where Apple is coming from, but I feel like if they could potentially find an ally to this terrorist or even help the government to better understand the attack, Apple should have to do it.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/18/cia-diversity-program-includes-effort-to-recruit-transgender-candidates.html?intcmp=hplnws
ReplyDeleteThis article is all about how the CIA is putting in efforts to begin recruiting transgender candidates. The CIA is also beginning to recruit more candidates from various races, sexualaties, and backgrounds. I think that this is a great idea, and honestly I'm not sure why is has taken so long for this to be put into place. It is unfair to discriminate against people because they may be gay, Hispanic, disabled, or anything like that. Everyone should be given a fair chance for any job. I'm not saying these people should be hired just because of their diversity, but they shouldn't be excluded from any opportunity.
I agree with you Taylor. It's nice that we're moving in the right direction when it comes to diversity. Including different races and people of all shapes and sizes and sexualities into the CIA really sets an example especially as a very prestigious American organization.
Deletehttp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/02/harper_lee_dead_at_age_of_89_t.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about the death of one of the greatest writers in the past 80 years. Harper Lee, the author of To Kill Mockingbird has died at the age of 89. Some don't know how creative and passionate one is about their work and what they do. Truly a gifted writer, and her achievements are well deserved. I read To Kill A Mockingbird last year for the first time, and man was I blown away. She was truly ahead of her time and deserved every bit the praise she got from that book. It is truly sad her being gone, it reminds me that everyone has their time and no one lives forever. But what I do know is that her achievements and contributions will live on forever.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/18/pope-questions-trumps-christian-faith-gop-candidate-blasts-disgraceful-comment.html
ReplyDeleteYou know I dont belive in religion and I try to avoid politics most times but I just have to say it is very disrespectful to question someones faith, I dont care if your god o'mighty it is very disrespectful and the pope question trump is disrespectful. No matter who you are you don't have to defend your religion.
Damarco HambyFebruary 19, 2016 at 7:59 AM
ReplyDeletehttp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/02/harper_lee_dead_at_age_of_89_t.html
Reply-I read her book To Kill A Mockingbird it was a amazing book in every aspect. Her death legacy will live on through out us book readers for her amazing books. Death cant be avoided for ever but what we do in our life time will live on for years to come All my respect goes to Harper Lee
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/02/18/scalias-death-has-landed-republicans-in-a-nasty-trap/
ReplyDeleteRepublicans once again prove they only care abut partisanship rather than running the country. They would never dare claim a Republican president should not nominate a justice to SCOTUS. Furthermore, the Constitution says the PRESIDENT has the right to nominate federal judges. There's nowhere that says only if he is a Republican. It's rather ironic that Republicans are defying the Constitution with their absurd claims of "precedent" of a president not nominating anyone in their last year in office when Scalia was an originalist. Scalia interpreted the Constitution very literally, and the Constitution is quite clear about who nominates justices. Moreover, their beloved former president Reagan nominated and confirmed a justice in his final year in office. What's even worse, they view it as a surrender if they allow President Obama to exercise his Constitutional right. This proves to me Republicans are hypocrites and do not care about compromise. No, they're only interested in furthering the interests of their Republican constituents rather than the whole country. They are the main culprits in this age of polarization.
Reply to Brittney & Curtiss
ReplyDeleteIt's not just a one time thing though. This could lead to the loss of privacy for all iPhone users. Also, we can't give up all our rights in the name of safety. Privacy is an essential freedom, especially in this digital age. If we give up this right, what will we give up next? I don't want to live in a police state. The FBI has undoubtedly saved us from terrorist attacks without needing to monitor us so closely. I am glad Apple is taking a stand for our civil liberties.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/politics/russia-icbm-asteroid-killer/index.htm
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how Russia plans to modify some of its intercontinental ballistic missiles to destroy asteroids before they hit Earth, according to a top Russian rocket researcher.The Russian missiles would be used to target smaller asteroids of 20 meters to 50 meters in diameter. But the U.S. is taking another approach by instead of blowing up the space rocks, NASA plans to shove them away from the planet. Which sounds way better then using missiles because they can use that as cover and also shoving things over without the use of weapons.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/us/beyonce-police-boycott/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how a Miami police union is urging a nationwide boycott by law enforcement labor organizations of Beyoncé's upcoming world tour, which is scheduled to begin in the city on April 27 at Marlins Park. The Police union believes that Beyoncé is to blame for the upraising that has been happening since her music video and half-time show aired on TV. Saying that things are getting out of control because the message that she is sending to the public.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-ungerleider-apple-fbi-iphone-20160218-story.html
ReplyDeleteThis is kind of good news but coming from a bad way. The fact that the fbi ask Apple to do something to their phones so they can get access to the information, then them saying no in response. Though, it is good that Apple is thinking about the potential consequences that could arise if they DID follow the fbi's request. If they agreed to their request and added a software update to make iphones have a intentional security risk so that the government can access terrorist's information. That would endanger everyone that updates to that version, you would(if you have a iphone)have a massive breach in security that not only the government can use, but ANYONE that finds out about that breach. In that breach they can have any information on a iphone, last calls, contacts, downloads, everything. Having something like may help the fbi in catching terrorist, however, it can harm more than it helps.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/opinion/a-little-reality-on-immigration.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about immigration and all the misconceptions about it. I agree with this article that the government doesn't focus enough on fixing its borders and the system in which immigrants have to go through to travel legally. The government focuses on deporting people who's only intentions are to better their lives. The article also says that people like Donald Trump are trying to turn back time and make the United States a white America again and that's unrealistic. We have to focus on working with what we have. Lastly the article corrected many misconceptions about immigration such as that it's increasing but it's actually been decreasing and more immigrants are leaving than are coming in
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/opinion/sunday/drone-warfare-precise-effective-imperfect.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis article is about using drones to carry out tasks instead of risking the lives of U.S. soldiers. Accuracy and precision are calculated by analysts. Critics say that civilians account for a high percentage of people killed in drone strikes. The author writes, “The program is not perfect. No military program is. But here is the bottom line: It works.” While the program does work, I’m not sure that it’s fair to put innocent people’s lives at risk. I think they should find a way to increase the accuracy.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/02/19/us/ap-ny-kesha-producer-clash.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about singer Kesha losing a battle against music producer Dr. Luke in a New York courtroom today. She claims the Dr. Luke drugged her and sexually abused her. She also claims that he psychologically abused her leading her to develop an eating disorder and suicidal thoughts which led to two months in rehabilitation. Dr. Luke claims that she’s trying to make him look bad to get out of her contract. Supreme Court Justice Shirley Kornreich says Kesha “is being given the opportunity to record.” I don’t think being given the opportunity to record justifies what Kesha went through and she shouldn’t have to work with Dr. Luke anymore. There is a reason why she doesn’t feel comfortable working with him and I think the court should try harder to see that instead of ignoring her claims.
This is very heart wrenching to hear, but unfortunately is very common especially in the Hollywood business. Kesha seemed to have gotten cheated out and deserved to be heard instead of just being happy of getting an opportunity to record.
DeleteThis is very sad to hear. I feel that the moral obligations should have been enough to undo the contract. I dont know if the rape charges would have done anything because there was no concrete evidence but there at least should have destroyed to the contract to terminate the toxic relationship.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/17/opinion/ugandas-least-equal-voters-the-lgbti.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is written by by an attorney a Uganda human rights activist named Nicholas Opiyo. He describes the current election cycle going on in the country, which is filled with dangerous ideologies and attitudes toward the LGBT+ community. Uganda has always had extremely and explicitly anti-gay legislation, but progress is being made. In 2014, one of their most oppressive laws toward these people was overturned. "However," as Opiyo states in the article, "the government still makes use of several other legal avenues that allow it to punish and silence people whose sexual identity is out of public favor." One example of anti-gay behavior can be found in the current presidential race. One of the candidates discredited one of the other candidates and urged voters to stop supporting him because he support gay rights. The public opinion on gays in Uganda is extremely negative. Roughly 92% feel that is is not consistent with Ugandan culture and religion and do not deserve the same constitutional rights as their heterosexual counterparts. The question now becomes what we can do and whether or not we should get involved. I feel that Americans should definitely be getting involved here. The problems of those people today have been the problems of gay Americans for centuries. It is time that people stand up for what is right and protect the rights of all people. These homophobic bullies have no right to value one life over another, especially when being gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc is not a choice. We need to have American politicians and interest groups meet with the Ugandans to help them reach some sort of resolution. Also, we should be encouraging pro-gay Ugandan groups and urging them to speak up for the topic in an attempt to gain public support.
http://cnn.it/1RHhCww
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how it might be the end of the era of ads and different things that went wrong with some of the presidential candidates’ ads. I don't think the era of ads is coming to an end anytime soon, ads are so common and a good way for voters to get informed, or at least recognize the candidates’ names. The article talked about how Cruz pulled one of his ads because people find out one of the actresses used to play some R rated roles, and how that was a missed opportunity to appeal to less likely republicans if he didn't get rid of it. I agree because most people think that republicans are all rich white men and that's not the case and this couldn't shown that, however I understand why he did it because it could have created a lot of unnecessary scandal.
I agree that ad will not be coming to an end anytime soon. Ads have been around forever and probably will be around forever just change the way they are sent out to the public to view.
Deletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-revive-the-electric-chair-in-virginia/2016/02/16/9ebaea50-d4eb-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html
ReplyDeleteThis article argues that method of execution in which death row inmates are electrocuted should be completely banned. This argument comes after Virginians try to revive the method of execution. On one side, it is an extremely painful and arguably cruel way to be killed. There are much simpler and painless ways of being executed. On the other hand, it is one of the cheapest ways to execute criminals and has been done for several years. I personally think that the electric chair should be an option for execution. One may argue that it is an extremely cruel and painful way for someone to be killed. This is true, but I don't think that matters. Criminals who are on death row are there for a reason. They have likely caused extreme harm to several people (their victim(s) and their victims' families). In my opinion, when you commit a crime that is bad enough to land you on death row, you waive any rights that you have. The death penalty is not a good thing, but it is needed. It has been shown that most criminals can NOT be rehabilitated. Oftentimes felons who leave jail will end up committing another crime. Lethal injections are a much more humane way to die, but the price for these is extremely expensive. I don't think that we should be paying so much in tax dollars so that murders and rapists can have an easy way to go out.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/19/news/companies/schlumberger-ceo-pay-oil-jobs/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis past year has been hard on the oil companies around the world. A company called Schlumberger lost 20% of their workforce which lead to less money but really? The CEO of this company made a heaping 18 million dollars from all of the workers being laid off and the money left over from it. In my opinion is okay because this is just standard business and what happens happens. Overall the CEO is the top dog of the company so he naturally will get the most,
http://nyti.ms/1XCTV97
ReplyDelete“ These unpledged delegates make up 30 percent of the 2,382 delegates whose votes are needed to win the nomination, and could thus make all the difference.”. There is always a risk thatcher delegate will not vote in the way that is being represented in constituents wishes and views. It's one of the negatives in the system . But then you thnk about it , it could be in a way , a good. Unfaithful deluges might actually be helping and allowing for the best candidate to be the one in office … Which is totally against American values , since it would be putting the decision at only the hands of a certain exclusive group. Bernie us worried about his votes going to Hilary. Both democrats have their flaws and strength buy hopefully it works out for them .
http://nyti.ms/1Qq6Iw6
ReplyDelete“ I am sorry to note that Donald Trump no longer seems to be at war with the pope.” as can be seen, this article completely trashes Trump. Yet it point out some veg interesting points. He obviously has political strength because he is still in the race yet there has been much attention on his lack to properly respond questions. He will act like he forgets or bring something new up. trump has sister, trump Barry in the court of appeals. Trump commented that she would make arrest chief justice and Cruz saw an opportunity to call her because she lead a movement against abortion . Obviously Trump has a freedom of speech but sometimes he doesn't use it to obtain the most positive response within many communities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/opinion/why-apple-is-right-to-challenge-an-order-to-help-the-fbi.html?ref=opinion
ReplyDeleteThis article was about the FBI ordering Apple to unlock one of the shooters from the December San Bernardino shooting, and how Apple has been denying the right. They are claiming it is unconstitutional and that unlocking one to find info will lead to opening multiple. I agree with Apple on not letting the FBI get into the shooters phone. For one, they would probably go beyond the "invading privacy" ; and for two, the shooters and shooting is over, there is no real reason to search their phones. All of their evidence is right of them, and the FBI does not need to invade people's Iphones.
Earlier, I didn't understand this situation and I thought that Apple would just be unlocking the one phone and the FBI wasn't very involved in the unlocking process. Now (I think this is right but I'm not sure), I've come to understand that the encryption code would be given to the FBI and would somehow apply to every iPhone that the FBI received. Also, some new information surfaced that the FBI had previously changed the pass-code on the iPhone while it was in their possession. Now, I think the FBI just wants the encryption code to be used in any other "suspicious" phones instead of for the concern of safety.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/opinion/sunday/why-is-mitch-mcconnell-picking-this-fight.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis opinion editorial was discussing Mitch McConnell's opinion on Justice Scalia's death and replacement. McConnell is the majority (republican) leader in the Senate. Within an hour of the death, McConnell announced that there would be little to no attempt for the Senate to support any nomination for a new Supreme Court Justice. There are records of other small outbursts from McConnell but none of them were public in order to keep McConnell in good standing for reelection. I think McConnell was a little to quick and harsh in his reaction. Kasich, lately, has been saying there needs to be more time for recovery instead of jumping right into politics after a tragedy. I agree with him 100%. Not everything needs to be an immediate battle.
Another interesting aspect of this editorial was it's mention of the changing political perspective in Washington. The officials have to change their values very often in order to remain popular in elections. This reminded me of primaries versus the general election. Very extreme left or right candidates must bring their ideas towards the center in order to win over more voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/opinion/republicans-see-how-long-they-can-hold-their-breath.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0
ReplyDeleteWith the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, many people in this nation are thinking about the legacy that he left behind, and especially if his spot on the supreme court will be replaced, those on the Democratic side are quick to point out that President Obama has the constitutionally given power to nominate a justice, while republicans believe that the nomination process should be held off until a new president is chosen. The real debate lies with whether or not this process could, or should, be delayed. This is the true debate when it comes to the nomination of a new justice, The supreme court can still function, albeit with some differences when it comes to even splits, so depending on one's point of view, the nomination of a justice might be important to stop such splits from occurring. But if Obama nominates a new justice, it may prove unfavorable to the republican ideology of this nation, then again, he must nominate a justice with senate approval, so that issue may be relieved, yet it may not as well. It's definitely an interesting story to follow, and i think we all are interested as to how this story will end.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-nevada-polls-are-bad/
ReplyDeleteThis article is about why the polls used to predict the Nevada Caucuses are unreliable compared to the polls used to predict the other primaries and caucuses. The Nevada caucus is new, having started in 2004, and the population of the state is still unfamiliar with how the process works, so many of the voters don't turn out for it and do not correctly answer if they will or will not when polled. The volatility of the nature of money and business based around the large economy of gambling in the state also results in a high population turnaround rate compared to other states, so many numbers still listed in directories no longer have owners that live in Nevada. The state also has a large population of Union workers that work nights and cannot answer the phone for polls conducted in the evening, and they may also not be able to attend the caucus itself.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/politics/donald-trump-apple-boycott/index.html
ReplyDeleteDonald Trump makes another ridiculous request. It has been, and is becoming more hard, personally, to take this man seriously. In this article by Jeremy Diamond, he asks for a boycott of Apple, the company. He requests this as what could only be an attempt to show he “cares” about this country and is a man who takes action. The reason he gives, however, is in order to get the company to release information involving the iPhone that a San Bernardino shooter used. I think this is unconstitutional despite the evil of the person involved.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/19/politics/jake-tapper-fact-checks-ted-cruz-on-supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-ruling/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is a quick fact check on Ted Cruz's opinion of Donald Trump's and Rubio's opinions on same-sex marriage. He says that it is bad that republicans are "echoing" a democrats opinion and states that they are saying that since it is a "settled law" then we must follow it. He also says that he will only choose court justices who would overturn the court ruling on same-sex marriage. Trump says that he doesn't support it but will evolve to it and would consider electing court justices who might overturn it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/opinion/superdelegates-clarify-your-role.html?_r=1
ReplyDeleteThe issue that this article talks about is super delegates in the upcoming presidential election. Super delegates do not have to vote for the candidate with the most votes, or majority, and therefore, they can vote however they like. They are 30% of the vote, so they can impact the turnout. The article uses the example of the New Hampshire primary, where even though Bernie Sanders HAD the majority, Clinton still ended up "tying" with him because of this. There has been a recent movement to try and get super delegates to vote for the candidate who receives the popular vote. Because super delegates can switch sides at any moment, who they will pick is not known.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/13/opinions/justice-scalia-death-lazarus/index.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about the death of Justice Scalia, and what impact he had on the court during his tenure. Scalia transformed the way the supreme court was run and executed, as pointed out by the article. Among his influences include the amount of questions asked by the justices, and the opinion writing of the court. I disagree with most of the opinions of Scalia, and think that in many things he was extremely backward and behind the times, but those dissenting opinions should be available on the bench. The supreme court should not be made up of likeminded and homogenous justices. They should come from all walks of life and all opinions of issues. As long as their opinions are rooted in their interpretation of the constitution and they have the experience to back up their career and the interpretations they have formed, they should be able to have their voice on the bench if the President and Congress approve.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/opinion/why-apple-is-right-to-challenge-an-order-to-help-the-fbi.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with a pole in the decision to not help the FBI to help unlock the phone. Everyone who is at least informed of the situation knows this won't be a just one time thing. The government will keep their paranoia and continue to keep invading the privacy by defending themselves with the national security excuse. Plus there is no secure way of making sure that no one else uses the backdoor. Once its open anyone else with the skill all be able to hack into people phones to gain private info.
This goes back and forth between the question on how much power the government should have, and whether we should give up personal rights in order to have security, like at an airport, or with breathalyzers in cars, or anything else like this. This is where our political system is especially sketchy, some people are all for these terrorists' phones being hacked, but are against their own being hacked on the other hand. Ultimately, if the rights are writer, the they should be guaranteed to all, and what the FBI is trying to do is an invasion of privacy, and a violation of the constitution
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2015/09/17/health/republican-debate-donald-trump-body-language/
ReplyDeleteIt's crazy to think about just how much plays a role in politics. Body language isn't something that we all do consciously a lot of the time, but someone like Trump pays attention to it a lot. This article compares Trump's alpha male style and attitude to Mussolini, and JFK. It doesn't shock me that he is good at acting confident, after all he is a scheming, terrible human being.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/opinion/how-to-reduce-crime-stop-charging-children-as-adults.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how old a child should be before they are tried as an adult and how that age could lower crime. Connecticut and Illinois are considering raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction to 21 while New York and North Carolina are the only states where 16 year olds can be tried as adults. Research shows that raising the age in Connecticut and Illinois has lowered the amount of prisoners and the amount of youths being rearrested. I think the age depends on how serious the crime was.
I think this is another aspect of the government that is hard to make laws about. If you're going to try a 16 year old as an adult, why not go further and try a 12 or 10 year old as an adult? And what's the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old? There isn't a real cut off as to where the age should be. I think for now, that the age should remain at 18 years old, since people know from that point that they're responsible for their own actions and need to accept repercussions.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete