Patrice Foster Professor Hayaud-Din Government 2301-2406 Summer I 2012 Extra Credit Abolishing The Exclusionary Rule Word Count: Patrice Foster The Exclusionary Rule The Exclusionary Rule is a senseless rule. We should get rid of it and the police and prosecutors should be able to use the evidence even if it’s obtained in violation of the rule, because we could potentially let criminals go to satisfy this rule. This rule is so full of controversy, that it is hard to support. How can we as citizens embrace this rule? A rule that does so little to protect the law as it was made.
Sarina Mason English 1301 9 October 2012 On the Road to Ruin? Aggressive driving is a major problem on our roads today. While most drivers are not aggressive, those that are account for most of the accidents. According to the website Agent insure, “Statistics say that 56% of destructive accidents and car crashes are caused majorly by driving aggressively”. (www.agentinsure.com) To counterbalance this dangerous activity, drivers need to become more conscious of their personal responsibility to be a defensive driver.
In the end, rape culture is definitely being spread through the media, often in a negative way. Rape culture and its continuing effects on the world are heavily influenced by the media, but that can be changed from a negative concept to a slightly more positive one if people can consistently stand up for the right ideas. It is no secret that once something is placed on the Internet, if it can generate enough interest, it will travel quickly. This can be very bad for the promotion of things like victim blaming and sexualized violence. If enough people see it, it’s going to gather many opinions, and unfortunately, there will be a lot of thoughts that agree with these horrible concepts.
Some people would argue that some ideas or images are simply too dangerous or radical to be displayed to the public. How can this be a sound argument, when the same people enjoy and actively reference their freedom of speech? Think about if influential books, articles, or movies were never published simply because they were too “indecent” or, dare I say it, too “thought-provoking”. Since when did people start sacrificing knowledge and intelligence for safety? It’s apparent that at least some people tend to disagree with censorship, recently being the Supreme Court.
The United States Judicial System and Racial Profiling ENG 122 Lisa M. Carlo May 27, 2013 The United States Judicial System and Racial Profiling There is reluctance in American society to talk about race and crime because race is a touchy subject. Everything in today's society has to be politically correct. One has to be very careful what they write or say because of the fear of what might happen if someone misunderstood what the real meaning to their statement was. For that reason, when a person talks about race and crime many individuals may interpret their opinions differently. Therefore, many people try to avoid talking about such controversial subjects.
This war, unfortunately, is not easily defined, has no obvious battle ground, and has an indefinite duration. Because of the sporadic nature of the war on terror, the government would not be justified and some actions are causing controversy. Current definitions of terrorism fail to capture the magnitude of the problem both locally and worldwide and the effect of the problem affects some communities more than others. The burden of using physical descriptions to look for terrorists has fallen on Muslims or Middle Easterners because the September 11 hijackers were of Middle Eastern descent. Most Americans were opposed to racial profiling before September 11.
The government, like any other from a different country, has censored a lot of information from us that shouldn’t be. Our world may seem under control and going well, but really when we think about things, its because we don’t know something, it has been blocked from us for any reason, or they (our government or any ruling power) try to eliminate things because we don’t want to loose control. On the contrast, like any argument there’s an opposing side. There is a large amount of people who believe in censorship due to information being taken in could cause physical or psychological harm. Also, other factors that could cause harm: national security, pornography, and privacy.
There are also opposing sides to this topic as well. With medical side effects that can cause more distress then the possible undesirable traits of a child the determination is not concrete. Many facts support the advancements and benefits but can also discourage the possibility of sex selection. After reading I hope that a person can be further informed and able to make an educated opinion as to whether or not this topic is ethical or not ethical. The author of this paper is strongly against the option to choose the gender of their child.
Eventually some people and their families might be forced to put financial concerns above the needs of a loved one. Doctors or insurance companies could try to convince some people to opt for assisted suicide rather than the more expensive treatment. This would be an injustice to all humankind. A history professor at San Francisco State University argued that assisted suicide would lead to inequities and would not be limited to those with a terminal illness. “Given the way the U.S. healthcare system is getting increasingly unjust and even savage, I don't think this system could be trusted to implement such a system equitably, or confine it to people who are immediately terminally ill"(Mohler).
However there is a small chance that there are people who are stupid or impressionable enough, that they should go act out a scene from these films, and these people are a small minority that don’t make any statistical difference. The issue is there are people out there that believe violent films provoke and are the cause to violence in our society, but by then end of this speech, they will be re-thinking their theory. * * Violence is a large topic. There so many un-answered questions on how to stop or reduce the amount of viciousness in our society. But blaming violent films isn’t the answer, because there is no proof the repeated exposure to cinematic horrors has more impact than, for example, mental illness, long-term unemployment and poverty, alienation, alcohol and drugs, mob behaviour or simply frustration and anger at the state of the world.