Gunning Down Elections

After the recent shooting in Colorado, many activists are jumping to arms against the second amendment. Despite these massive pleas though, hardly anything is being done to regulate gun laws. Many politicians consider the topic to be untouchable. One strong word against the right to bear arms could cause thousands of gun owners to vote against you. It's a touchy subject.
      That's not to say nothing should be done to fix gun laws. Access to guns is too easy. With a simple click on the internet, thousands of rounds can be sent to your house. There should be more checks and balances. Around 40% of gun sales have had no background checks. Guns shouldn't be taken away, but they should be harder to get. Maybe people should have to take classes to receive guns, such as new drivers do.
     Making guns illegal is not a solution though. If someone really wants a gun, they will get one. If guns were made illegal, then only outlaws would have guns, which is far from ideal. Guns also keep the government from turning the nation into a dictatorship. Although extreme, guns allow citizens to fight back in worst case scenarios.
    There is no question that something needs to be done to the gun laws. No one should be able to gun down 100 people on a whim. The hard question is what should be done? Answers will not come if lawmakers fear being voted out of office for encroaching on the subject. Open-mindedness is needed to find a solution.

Commentary: Southern Hospitality

          In the editorial Southern Hospitality, the author Ogechi E. discusses the apparent attack on the first amendment due to the reactions at the NAACP national convention. Ogechi brings up many valid points such as the idea that we are wrongly persecuting people for expressing their opinion. If the audience at the national convention did not showcase how they feel towards Romney's ideas, then the Republican candidate (or anyone else for that matter) would not know how the American people feel. The attack on the vocal opinion of people is a direct attack on not only the first amendment, but on the voice of the people. 

        We must express our opinions if we are to be heard and we can't do that through quiet observance. Yes, by all means give someone a chance but if that chance is wasted then you have the right to vocalize your opinion.  Romney also should have known the audience he was talking to better, so he could appeal to them and not get booed of stage, although it may have been a lost cause to begin with due to the large backing of Obama in the NAACP. Romney should be able to hold up to criticism like any other politician should. If he has the nerve to run for president, he should have tough enough skin to withstand a booing crowd. So let them boo, because he can take it. Like Ogechi said, it's not like they are threatening to kill him, just trying to kill the ideas of the campaign.

    

       

Affording College Education

     It can seem at many times Romney is incredibly out of touch. His riches have sheltered him from the world of the common man and the hardship that they must overcome. One of these challenges is getting a college education so as to survive in this falling economy. As difficult as it already is to pay for and succeed in college, Romney wants to do nothing to help the poor, brilliant students and possibly deprive them of financial aid.
      Romney is harkening back to medieval times with these ideas and policies. With his idea to cut spending on higher education he is in turn creating a society that is similar to serfdom during the dark ages. Yes, people still have more freedom than those of that time period, but they will be forced into different social classes just because of their parents wealth. A brilliant student who could create the next big technology or cure cancer is being held back because his parents are poor. You can't succeed in this country if you aren't given a chance and Romney loading the dice towards the wealthy.
     How can we be a government for the people when we can't help the people? That's against the people. Obama on the other hand is creating new policies to help students get out of their huge debt from college. In times like this where our economy is dropping and the U.S. as a nation is falling off the horse, we need bright stars to guide us to keep our top spot in the world. If we drop the ball on education then we won't be able to fuel our economy in the future, instead relying on employees from other countries to run the high-end jobs. Soon, the U.S. will not be a world power and will become a second tier country.
     Cheaper loans and more opportunities for students is the route the U.S. needs to take to maintain its position as a world power.

Romney, Serfdom, and You

     I recently read an article on Think Progress that was titled Romney: Students Should Get ‘As Much Education As They Can Afford’. This caught my attention because I'm soon to be a college student and I would hate financial aid to be cut. It can seem at many times Romney is incredibly out of touch. His riches have sheltered him from the world of the common man and the hardship that they must overcome. One of these challenges is getting a college education so as to survive in this falling economy. As difficult as it already is to pay for and succeed in college, Romney wants to do nothing to help the poor, brilliant students and possibly deprive them of financial aid.
    The author of this article does a fine job of presenting the argument and backing it up with quotes from Romney. The author is obviously a bit angry over Romney's lack of support toward the poor but instead of voicing a strong forceful opinion against the subject, the author supplies facts that will lead the reader to a similar opinion. This is a good method because it just shows how blatantly Romney doesn't care for the poor students who can't afford college.
    Romney is harkening back to medieval times with these ideas and policies. With his idea to cut spending on higher education he is in turn creating a society that is similar to serfdom during the dark ages. Yes, people still have more freedom than those of that time period, but they will be forced into different social classes just because of their parents wealth. A brilliant student who could create the next big technology or cure cancer is being held back because his parents are poor. You can't succeed in this country if you aren't given a chance and Romney loading the dice towards the wealthy.
   

The Flaws of Censorship

     Censorship is one of the more flawed policies in human history. Not just in the case of current censorship, but censorship throughout history. After reading the editorial  Void for Vagueness, my thoughts were steered back to the idea that censorship, on most levels, is inherently stupid. Not only does it apply condescending actions, where some people think they know what is best for humanity, but it also creates separation between those that understand and those that don't, who are wondering why they aren't told. Now what I just said doesn't exactly apply to the editorial but more of the broader idea of censorship between the government and the general public.

    In regards to the article though, which talks about the FCC and their censorship of 'obscene human areas' and bad language, a more narrow view is needed. The author of this editorial calls for the reopening of the 1978 supreme court decision. This decision called for partial intrusion on the first amendment by censoring public televison, radio, etc. The idea to reopen this case is intelligent because the censorship never really did anything besides impart an annoying buzzing noise over a part of foul language. The idea that this actual covers up the word is ridiculous and is insulting to the intelligence of everyone it is trying to hide it from. Probably 95% of all Americans can safely guess what the obscene word is. All this buzzing noise does is draw more attention to the foul language. For all those people that say it is protecting the children, what is it protecting them from. Sure it is saving them from half a word but does that also stop the children from hearing it from other adults or better yet their parents. Kids know pretty much know all this language and speak it by 5th grade regardless of this censorship. How exactly is understanding this language bad? Yes it gives people more tools to insult people but even if they didn't know these words, there are cleverer ways of degrading people through the English language. If someone really wants to insult someone, they will.

     The partial nudity fines are also ridiculous. Its not the broadcasting stations fault for the occasional nip-slip or other private parts. I'm not calling for pornography on television but I'm pretty sure every human knows what the naked human body looks like. Subtle sexuality is understandable if its not blasted in our face all the time. 

    The FCC's fining powers and censorship should more defined and less vague if it is going to be able to withstand the convincing liberal arguments against it.

All Men are Created Equal... If You're American

         Today, I browsed an interesting article, dealing with immigration, in The New York Times. This article titled, "Evangelical Groups Call for New Stance on Illegal Immigration" talked about a affiliation of religious organizations requesting better opportunities for illegal immigrants as opposed to the views of the Republican Party. The Republican party is "hawkish" in its views on illegal immagration suggesting harsh policies alienanting the hispanic vote at times. The evangelical groups suggest policies that would give Illegals more rights.
       I feel this article displays a relevant opinion that is useful to the understanding of an important topic of the upcoming presidential election.
       I've never been directly impacted by immigration but I feel I have a thoughtful valid opinion on the subject. I feel we should allow Illegal immigrants the chance to get citizenship if they have already entered the U.S. That being said however I feel we should also tighten up the border because we're becoming over populated. So, if somehow you're an illegal an get across the border more power to you. I want someone with that courage in our country. Many Americans don't realize how much illegal immigrants do for us. They work the minimum paying jobs that most Americans are too lazy or arrogant to work. These same Americans are the ones who say the Illegals are taking there jobs. These Americans probably wouldn't work there if they had the chance. They think too highly of themselves. So I believe illegal immigrants should work until they make enough money to buy a citizenship, instead of being shunned from America's apparently inalienable rights.