When Will It Stop?

Yet again, I must write a post about what could’ve been a devastating school shooting.  Last week, 20 year old Michael Brandon Hill walked into McNair Discovery Learning Academy in Decatur, Georgia armed with an AK-47 and over 500 rounds of ammunition.  Thankfully, he encountered school bookkeeper, Antionette Tuff who was able to talk him into surrendering.  By keeping her composure, detailing her own struggles in life and offering to pray for Hill, Ms. Tuff became a true American hero.

Whenever I blog about an issue that relates to a previous post, I always post the link so you can read my thoughts and your fellow students’ comments.  It was with a heavy heart today that I realized just how many times I have posted about senseless gun violence on this blog: Fort Hood, Virginia Tech, Aurora Colorado, Tucson Arizona, and of course, Newtown Connecticut.  If you’re interested in reading any of these posts, you can use the search word “shooting” in the search bar located at the top of the page.

Each time we have a mass shooting such as this (and there have just been far too many in my opinion), our nation’s political dialogue becomes more focused on our country’s gun laws. Some have felt that we need stricter gun laws to prevent tragedies such as this from happening. According to Senator Dianne Feinstein, “weapons of war don’t belong on our streets”. Colorado Governor, John Hickenlooper, expressed skepticism that tougher gun laws would’ve prevented the Aurora, Colorado tragedy stating, “If there were no assault weapons available – this guy’s going to find something right?” Senator Ron Johnson agrees, “I don’t think society can keep sick, demented, individuals from obtaining any type of weapon to kill people. Somebody who purposely wants to harm another individual is going to find a method to do so”.

 I’ll be frank – I’m torn on this issue. I don’t come from a family that owns guns. I don’t think I would want one in my home. That being said, I strongly support the U.S. Constitution and the people’s right to bear arms. I just think there should be better background checks, waiting periods, etc. I think the real problem here is a lack of mental healthcare in this country – which might be a whole other blog. I know I don’t have all the answers, but it’s clear to me that something must be done to stop, (or at least try and stop) this senseless violence.

So my question to you this week is, “How do you feel about our country’s gun laws? What should the government’s responsibility be, if anything, in preventing crimes like this in the future?” Answers are due no later than Sunday, September 1st. My thoughts and prayers go out to anyone affected by senseless violence, especially the community of Decatur, Georgia.

 

 

Does Welfare Equal Drug Use?

Earlier this year, the Indiana legislature passed a bill that requires recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) to take and pass a written drug test in order to secure their welfare benefits.  If the written test indicates likely drug use, recipients could be chosen for monthly random drug tests.  If you’re like me, you’re wondering how someone takes a written drug test.  This was something I’d never even heard of prior to this legislation.  How would a written test determine if you had used drugs?  In my research for this post, I found a few of the questions that are asked on the test – individuals are told to answer yes or no.:

• At times, I feel worn out for no special reason
• I have not lived the way I should
• I don’t like to sit and daydream
• I have a drink first thing in the morning to steady my nerves

Wow!  Here I was thinking I’m just extra tired some days, meanwhile, it could indicate to somebody that I have a substance abuse problem.  If the written test indicates likely drug use, you could be chosen for monthly random drug test.  Test positive, and you’re looking at a mandatory treatment program, or loss of your benefits.  Should you choose treatment; you will continue to be drug tested on a monthly basis for four months.  Fail another test, and you will lose your TANF benefits for three months.  Fail a third test, and you’re banned for life.

Drug testing welfare recipients is an issue heating up all around the country.  Currently, legislation has been proposed in 29 states and passed in 8.  Supporters say testing welfare recipients will cost $.5 million, but will save the state $1.5 million in aid they would withhold from drug users.  They say it’s imperative that individuals aren’t using government money to buy drugs.

Opponents feel the new legislation amounts to nothing more than suspicion-less, population-based screening.  They cite studies which show that drug and alcohol issues among welfare recipients are not widespread.  In fact, studies have shown that while welfare recipients are slightly more likely than a comparison group to use drugs or alcohol, the differences were rarely statistically significant.  Mandatory testing may turn a person away from applying for benefits, which in turn, takes away resources from children in those families.

So, my question to you this week is, “What do you think of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients?  Is it smart public policy or an infringement of civil liberties?”  Answers are due no later than Sunday, August 25^th, 2013.

 

Did We All Get Snowed?

Last week in class we discussed investigatory journalism, and how sometimes, the media can sometimes hold the government accountable by uncovering stories that otherwise wouldn’t be revealed to the public.  By now, I’m sure you have all heard about Edward Snowden, an American computer specialist who worked for the CIA and National Security Agency (NSA), and subsequently leaked details of several top secret U.S. and British government mass surveillance programs.  The leaked information showed that the NSA was collecting data from thousands of mobile phone calls to and from U.S. citizens, not only without a warrant, but without their knowledge.  On June 14^th, Snowden was charged with espionage and theft of government property.  He left the United States prior to the publication of surveillance information, and currently resides in Russia, which has granted him temporary asylum.

Some have hailed Snowden a “hero” and a true American patriot.  Snowden has stated he felt it was his duty to “inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them.”  Many feel these surveillance programs are unlawful and interfere with an individuals’ right to privacy.

Other feels Snowden is an American traitor.  His actions have resulted in the most significant NSA security breech in U.S. history.  Multiple countries, under pressure from the U.S. government refused to grant Snowden political asylum, including Spain, France and Italy.  A poll conducted by USA today and Pew Research found 49% of Americans thought Snowden’s actions served the public interest, while 44% thought his actions harmed the U.S. government.

So, my question to you this week is, “Do you think Snowden’s actions represent those of an American hero or an American traitor?  Do you support surveillance of citizens’ phone records, if it means making the country more secure from terrorists?”  Answers are due no later than Sunday, August1 8th, 2013.

  

The Modern Day Picasso

It might surprise you to know that I’m a big Jay Z fan. His first album, Reasonable Doubt dropped the summer I graduated from high school.  His songs filled the clubs and parties when I was in college.  Several years later, I saw him in concert on the Hard Knocks Life tour.  To this day, I can’t hear an old Jay Z song without remembering my good old college days.  Makes me feel kind of old.  J

Jay Z and I kind of grew up together.  Wherever I was in life – his music was right there with me.  Which is why I was excited to watch the premiere of his new video “Picasso Baby: A Performance Art Piece,” which premiered on HBO this past Friday.  Inspired by the performance artist Marina Abramovic,  (who is also featured in the video) Jay Z rapped for six straight hours, as individuals approached him and were able to interact with him.  You can check out the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMG2oNqBy-Y

I love performance art, and I really enjoyed the concept of this piece.  Even if you’re not a Jay Z fan, I encourage you to watch it.  Several quarters ago, I wrote a post on public art and the value it brings to a community.  Public art can educate, increase property values, draw more tourism to a city and lower crime.  You can check out my thoughts and what you fellow students wrote here: http://historicalandpoliticalissues.blogspot.com/2011/11/next-great-indy-artist.html

So my question to you this week is, “If money were no object – meaning you didn’t have to worry about how much money your project would cost – what type of art piece would you create for the city?  Would you consider doing a performance art piece?  What would your message be?”  Answers are due no later than Sunday, August 11^th, 2013.

Living Water

Some of you already know that I spent our last break in Nicaragua on a mission trip.  Water and all it symbolizes became a re-occurring theme for me while on this trip. I knew beforehand that the water in Nicaragua wasn’t safe for us to drink. We had large jugs of warm, but clean water at the mission project, so I didn’t think too much about it prior to going. It wasn’t until I was actually there in front of the sink that I realized I would need bottled water to brush my teeth. I started noticing just how much I rely on water throughout the day. Every time I showered, or washed my hands, or saw my clothes being washed, I had the conscience thought that the water wasn’t “clean”. I can’t quite explain it, but water was on my mind a lot.

Going into it, I knew water was a scarce resource for many developing countries.  I also knew that the United States is a big consumer of all the world’s natural resources and I wondered just what effect that would have on my experience.  What I didn’t know is the extent of our wastefulness. Consider the following:

• Americans use about 100 gallons of water at home each day.
• Millions of the world’s poorest subsist on less than 5 gallons per day.
• 46% of the world’s population doesn’t have water piped to their homes (yet we have a water cooler in our office!)
• 1 out of 8 people in the world lack access to clean water.
• 3.3 million people die from water-related health problems each year.
• In Florida, 3,000 gallons are used to water the grass for each golf game played – and that’s just in Florida!
• U.S. swimming pools lose 150 billion gallons to evaporation each year.

When you are standing in a developing country, watching kids play right next to open sewage flowing down the path – it becomes apparent just how wasteful we really are.  It made me feel really shameful actually.  I already cared deeply about the environment prior to going on this trip, but this experience awakened the activist in me.  Having access to clean water should be a human right. 

So my question to you this week is two-fold, “Do you think the United States should spend money to help the developing world obtain access to clean water – even when we have our own problems right here at home?  What are some things you could do to lower your own water usage?”  Answers are due no later than Sunday, August 5^th, 2013.

I'll Follow You Until You Love Me

I woke up this morning to news that the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton is in labor.  After weeks of paparazzi being on “baby watch” the frenzy is now even more heightened as they camp outside the hospital hoping to capture a picture.  I understand this baby will be third in line to the Royal throne, but I can’t help but feel they should give the woman some space.  I’m sure I don’t have to remind you that Princess Diana, was tragically killed in 1996 after being pursued on a high-speed chase by paparazzi, who then stood over her dying body and continued to snap photos of her last moments alive.

Here in America, we have even more lenient laws towards paparazzi.  The list of celebrities who have had altercations with paparazzi is long, and usually results in the celebrity being criminally charged.  Consider the following:

• Chris Martin, the front man for the band Coldplay was charged with malicious damage after attacking a paparazzi’s car for getting too close to his wife Gwyneth Paltrow, who was pregnant at the time.
• In 2010 Russell Brand was arrested for battery after he pushed a photographer for trying to take an up-skirt photo of his then-girlfriend, Katy Perry.
• In January, a paparazzo was killed after pursuing Justin Bieber on a high-speed chase down the Los Angeles freeway.
• In June, Kim Kardashian was boxed in by four cars on the freeway, who then forced her to slow down so they could photograph her through the windows.  When she complained, she says they subsequently threatened her life and the life of her unborn child.
• Last week, Kanye West was involved in an altercation with paparazzi at LAX, which is currently under investigation and may result in charges for the star.

Many say this is just the unfortunate price of fame.  Celebrities know what they’re getting in to when they choose high profile careers.  The paparazzi have a job to do, and the better or more scandalous the photos, the more money they make.  Others say it’s a dangerous violation of privacy and there needs to be tougher laws.  In a few weeks, we will discuss the right to privacy, which is an implied right in America, not an enumerated one.  We will talk about how the Courts have ruled in privacy cases that don’t involve celebrities.  So my question to you this week is, “What do you think about paparazzi who will “do anything” to get the shot?  Should we enforce tougher laws and restrictions on them, or are they only doing their job?  Would you feel differently if you were a celebrity?”  Answers are due no later than Sunday, July 28^th, 2013.

Justice For Trayvon - Part 2

I’m sure by now you all have heard about the Trayvon Martin case.  Martin was a 17 year old, unarmed, high school student who was fatally shot after an altercation with George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch coordinator.  I initially blogged about the details of the case last year, shortly after Zimmerman was arrested for murder, 45 days after Martin’s death.  You can read my initial post, including Zimmerman’s 9-1-1 call and see your fellow students’ comments here: http://historicalandpoliticalissues.blogspot.com/search?q=trayvon

On Sunday, a jury found Zimmerman not guilty of the charges, which set off demonstrations around the country protesting the verdict.  The jury found Zimmerman innocent under Florida’s controversial “Stand Your Ground” law, which allows individuals to use “justifiable force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of unlawful threat”.

So my question to you this week is two-fold.  “Do you agree or disagree with the jury’s verdict?  Do you agree with “Stand Your Ground” laws – why or why not?”  You must answer both questions to earn full credit.  Answers are due no later than Sunday, July 21^st, 2013.