Give enough information in your title so that a reader can decide if it is something that he or she wishes to read.
Search This Blog
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Hero or Accomplice? 14 year-old charged on total of 44 counts.
Friday, October 15, 2010
What Is Really More Important?
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Response to Robot Love: Are we too Dependent?
In response to my first blog post, Robot Love: Are We too Dependent? I want to point out the affect of our technology dependence on future generations. When you look back, its hard to remember exactly what we did before Facebook, Google, Mapquest, or Internet period. It's hard to remember the times where you had to actually had to call some one to communicate with them, or go to the library when you had an unanswered question, or even stop and read a map when you got lost. If our generation is slowly moving away from doing these things, you can only imagine what our future generation will be doing. The underlying concern is, what will happen if all of our modern day and possibly future technological conviences were to disappear? Would our future generation suffer from not knowing how to complete everyday tasks that are made simple because of technology? While it's difficult to imagine all of our technological advances 'disappearing', it is certainly a possibility. With computers taking over everything to everday tasks to jobs, would our future generation be at loss because of our dependence on technology?
Death or Life

The death penalty is one method of punishment that sentences the criminal to death for certain extreme offenses. Some countries see the death penalty as wrong, and have abolished it in their country. In the United States, the death penalty is not abolished, but there are many arguments as to if it should still be used. In 2008, only 37 states in the U.S. still used the death penalty. The 13 states in which abolished the death penalty are of the following: Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Nebraska and New York has claimed that one method of execution violated their states' constitution. A criminal can be sentenced to death row by one main crime, murder. In Georgia, "murder, kidnapping with a ransom when the victim dies, aircraft hijacking, and treason" are all crimes punishable by the death penalty. Other states include more and less crimes, but the basis is murder. Call me old fashioned, but if you are able to take the life of another and it was not forced, the death penalty is just. Americans who disbelieve in the death penalty claim that is should be abolished because "people make mistakes, and killing someone is wrong, and two wrongs do not make a right." On the other hand, in which I strongly agree, killing with the intentions of killing, is not a mistake. "They deserve to die, and not sentencing to death will only give that person another chance to commit the same crime." Sarah Palin, a U.S. Politician and former Alaskan Governor quotes "We have a right to know that someone who rapes and murders a child or kills an innocent person in a drive-by shooting will never be able to do that again." Along with agreeing with Palin, I also agree with George W. Bush, Former U.S. President, that "the death penalty is not about revenge, but about saving other people's lives." The death penalty should not abolished. The punishment of it will keep some criminals in line and delete criminals who choose to still offend this law.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Don't Ask, Don't Tell
In current news, the White House and Congress are actively examining the remaining issues of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT). Recently, the United States Department of Defense to immediately stop the enforcement of the policy. The Justice Department is only allowed 60 days to appeal this action, but they have not yet made the decision towards if they are going to. As noted, the final decision does not effect President Obama. In regards to the Democrats and Republicans, the entire Republican caucus filibustered (talking out a bill) a defense bill that included the measure to repeal this controversial policy. The ultimate decision of this policy will result in thousands of men and women being booted from the service because of their sexual orientation. Last month, a ruling took place by the U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips interpreting that the DADT policy was not only unconstitutional, but it would take a direct effect on the military. In Yahoo News, this worldwide injunction by the federal judge has caused numerous to protest and attempt to persuade the Justice Department not to appeal the decision already made. Also, many believe that the decision made has been the perfect one towards the right step because apparently Congress has been taking too long for them. According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network mentioned to gay troops that they should not have exploited their sexuality just yet. Eventually, they have come to the realization that the Justice Department may appeal the ban on the policy. Barring this appeal, previous service members may possibly be getting their job back because they resigned from their position before. The decision made by the Justice Department has notified most that banning opening gay troops from the service is a violation of the first amendment. As of now, a major concern involves the recruiting process being directly interrupted because of sexual orientation. Until the hopeful appeal of the policy, Gay Rights Activists and service members will be on the edge of their seats in regards to their careers.
KEEP YOUR HANDS ON THE WHEEL!!
