In the blog entitled “Marijuana law in Texas” the author, brings up some very good points about Texas’s drug enforcement. I agree with author, Texas does need to overhaul their marijuana laws. The whole reason marijuana became illegal in the first place was because the government wanted another way to crack down on Hispanics and blacks. By painting marijuana as a drug that is used by the minorities in America, the American government could pass any crazy law that they could think, and the white majority would go along with it. As long as they were “saving America from the drugs of the minorities” the government could passed any harsh drug laws that they wanted. I learn a lot watching the History channel! Did you ever think about why Marijuana drug laws are so minor in Northwest part of the United States? It might have a lot to do with race.
In conclusion, in Austin I fell like the enforcement of marijuana laws are almost nonexistence. Travis County is much more liberal than the surrounding counties. So I agree with the author that if they want to enforce marijuana drug laws then a fine for less than 4 oz. seems fair. Putting people in jail for minor marijuana infractions just seems idiotic to me. Really the best thing would be for cops just to destroy any marijuana that they find on a person. Most marijuana smokers just want to smoke, have a good time, live their life, and be left alone. Isn’t that what we all want?
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Friday, April 25, 2008
Texas finally made a move
More than 400 children were removed from the compound of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints earlier this month by the Texas Child Welfare organization. My question is, "What took so long?" We can not let people corrupt something as beautiful as religion for their own sick beliefs. People have hide behind religion as a defense for a long time. Did we not learn anything from David Koresh and his followers in Waco. I really feel like break away sects and cults are a serous problem in Texas.
Just today Prakashanand Saraswati,(the founder of the Hindu temple Barsana Dham in Hays Co.) was arrested on 20 child indecency counts going as far back as 1993. What the hell is going on here? Does the state of Texas just give child molesters a free pass if the live on a "religious compound". Are we so afraid of offended someones religion in order to let innocent children be abused. Here is an idea. Children are not allowed to live on a religious compounds, period. You have to be 18 to live there. It might seem harsh to tell a parent that a child can't live with them. But too bad. Leaving children alone with men is just a bad idea. I don't know how else I can put it. Thank you Texas for trying to clean up the problem. But every time we bring another child abusing religious sect down, another one takes it place.
Just today Prakashanand Saraswati,(the founder of the Hindu temple Barsana Dham in Hays Co.) was arrested on 20 child indecency counts going as far back as 1993. What the hell is going on here? Does the state of Texas just give child molesters a free pass if the live on a "religious compound". Are we so afraid of offended someones religion in order to let innocent children be abused. Here is an idea. Children are not allowed to live on a religious compounds, period. You have to be 18 to live there. It might seem harsh to tell a parent that a child can't live with them. But too bad. Leaving children alone with men is just a bad idea. I don't know how else I can put it. Thank you Texas for trying to clean up the problem. But every time we bring another child abusing religious sect down, another one takes it place.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Top 10% arguement
I disagree with Eduardo about the top 10% of highschool students getting automatically accepted to college. The main argument is not every highschool is equal. Some highschools are more challenging than others due to their economics and size. If you go to a poorer school, you generally need a lower GPA to be in the 10%. Whereas at a richer school, that is more competitive, you need a very high GPA to make the top 10%. Also, the size of school can be an issue. A small school with a graduating class of 100 only gets 10 kids automatically accepted to college. A larger graduating class of 300 gets 30 kids automatically accepted. Now who is to say which kids truly deserve to get automatically accepted, because the math does not take in account of the difficulty of the school?
Sometimes kids are not ready for college right away. Again if you didn’t go to a competitive highschool and got to be in the top 10% because you had a large graduating class, doesn’t mean you are ready for college. In highschool you don’t learn time management. I propose using just your GPA, SAT scores, and an essay exampling why you should be automatically accepted to college would better judge to person to see if they are ready for college.
Sometimes kids are not ready for college right away. Again if you didn’t go to a competitive highschool and got to be in the top 10% because you had a large graduating class, doesn’t mean you are ready for college. In highschool you don’t learn time management. I propose using just your GPA, SAT scores, and an essay exampling why you should be automatically accepted to college would better judge to person to see if they are ready for college.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Hey Austin, butt-out of smoker's business!
Today the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, located in New Orleans, announced it upheld Austin’s smoking ban, reversing a lower court’s decision. A district court had overturned parts of the ban, which was approved by Austin voters more than two years ago. The law was challenged by several bars, which claim the ban harmed their business. The district court decided the law was unconstitutionally vague, and the City of Austin appealed the ruling. The ruling also stopped an injunction that kept the city from enforcing the law.
So basically we are back to where we started in Austin, no smoking inside. I find this whole law ridiculous. I feel that if an establishment wants to allow smoking indoors, it is a free country and they should be allowed to. I find it very frightening that a certain type of people is being singled out and having their freedom attacked. The freedom I am talking about is the freedom of choice. Last time I checked smoking isn’t illegal, therefore, it should not be illegal to smoke in designated establishments.
Now don’t get me wrong, I am not saying you can smoke anywhere you want. But you should have a choice to at least go to an establishment that allows smoking indoors. Establishments with children or the elderly should have an area blocked off for smokers, if they want. We had the smoking section in restaurants for decades, and it seemed to work just fine. The government has no right to tell a business how to run itself. This is a free market and if an establishment want to cater to a smoker, then more power to them. Last time I checked this isn’t China or some communist regime who decides how everyone lives. If the ban on smoking indoors continues, who will be next? Banning people’s choices is a slippery slope; once you start it just keeps snowballing and it very difficult to stop.
So basically we are back to where we started in Austin, no smoking inside. I find this whole law ridiculous. I feel that if an establishment wants to allow smoking indoors, it is a free country and they should be allowed to. I find it very frightening that a certain type of people is being singled out and having their freedom attacked. The freedom I am talking about is the freedom of choice. Last time I checked smoking isn’t illegal, therefore, it should not be illegal to smoke in designated establishments.
Now don’t get me wrong, I am not saying you can smoke anywhere you want. But you should have a choice to at least go to an establishment that allows smoking indoors. Establishments with children or the elderly should have an area blocked off for smokers, if they want. We had the smoking section in restaurants for decades, and it seemed to work just fine. The government has no right to tell a business how to run itself. This is a free market and if an establishment want to cater to a smoker, then more power to them. Last time I checked this isn’t China or some communist regime who decides how everyone lives. If the ban on smoking indoors continues, who will be next? Banning people’s choices is a slippery slope; once you start it just keeps snowballing and it very difficult to stop.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Real Change
In the article, Real Change the author is proud of the recent record turnout of voters for this election. The author issues a challenge to the voters to "keep voting in every one of them [elections]: If you really mean it, keep voting. Don't stop now." The author also challenges voters to vote in their local city council and school board elections. I agree with the author and think that you should go out in vote as many elections as possible.
The author shows some statistics that prove their point about people only voting in big elections. "4.2 million people cast ballots in the Republican and Democratic primaries -- a turnout of 33.2 percent of the state's registered voters. In contrast, city council and school board candidates drew less than 7 percent of eligible voters; the hottest race on the council ballot drew less than 11 percent. “I agree with the author that most people could care less about their "local meaningless" elections. People only go out in vote when they believe they are part of something bigger. With the countless ads to vote in the primaries this year, it has finally become "uncool" not to vote. The author is trying to point out that if you are going to turn out in record numbers to vote in the primary, the local elections should at least get some kind of boost. I know most elections don't have the money or appeal of the primary or presidential elections, but voting in your local elections is just as important.
The author shows some statistics that prove their point about people only voting in big elections. "4.2 million people cast ballots in the Republican and Democratic primaries -- a turnout of 33.2 percent of the state's registered voters. In contrast, city council and school board candidates drew less than 7 percent of eligible voters; the hottest race on the council ballot drew less than 11 percent. “I agree with the author that most people could care less about their "local meaningless" elections. People only go out in vote when they believe they are part of something bigger. With the countless ads to vote in the primaries this year, it has finally become "uncool" not to vote. The author is trying to point out that if you are going to turn out in record numbers to vote in the primary, the local elections should at least get some kind of boost. I know most elections don't have the money or appeal of the primary or presidential elections, but voting in your local elections is just as important.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Unreasonable Search and Seizure
In the article from the Houston Chronicle, "Long wait. Finally, a jury can decide if deputies can intrude without warrant and arrest without probable cause." the author revisits an old arrest that happened 6 years ago. On Jan. 4, 2002, two brothers (Sean Carlos Ibarra and Erik Adam Ibarra) allege, sheriff's deputies unlawfully stormed their property without a warrant, falsely arrested them without cause and destroyed film in a camera. The camera had been used to photograph the deputies as they conducted a drug raid in the neighborhood. I agree with the author that the police goes to far in some situations, especially this one. It seems the police force were frustrated by the citizens filming their activities in the neighborhood and decided to confront the Ibarra brothers.
The author is stunned that is has taken six years to wait for justice, but the lawsuit filed by Sean Carlos Ibarra and Erik Adam Ibarra finally went to trial this week. I agree with the author that "the case will further test whether sheriff's deputies have the right to enter people's homes without probable cause and with apparent impunity. It will ask whether law enforcement officers can seize cameras from law-abiding citizens, destroy film and pay no price for their actions." The deputies' attorney, Cliff Harrison, said the incident began when Sean Ibarra resisted deputies at the scene. But the officers, who had no cause to confront Ibarra, should have given Ibarra nothing to resist in the first place. The Ibarra brothers, found innocent of all wrongdoing when they were tried on charges of resisting arrest, have already paid a heavy price for the deputies' improper liberties. This is just another example of the police force overstating their powers. I am glad the author brought this case to light and shows that the government does go back and try to right wrongs. Even when it is their own employees who are the ones abusing the power.
The author is stunned that is has taken six years to wait for justice, but the lawsuit filed by Sean Carlos Ibarra and Erik Adam Ibarra finally went to trial this week. I agree with the author that "the case will further test whether sheriff's deputies have the right to enter people's homes without probable cause and with apparent impunity. It will ask whether law enforcement officers can seize cameras from law-abiding citizens, destroy film and pay no price for their actions." The deputies' attorney, Cliff Harrison, said the incident began when Sean Ibarra resisted deputies at the scene. But the officers, who had no cause to confront Ibarra, should have given Ibarra nothing to resist in the first place. The Ibarra brothers, found innocent of all wrongdoing when they were tried on charges of resisting arrest, have already paid a heavy price for the deputies' improper liberties. This is just another example of the police force overstating their powers. I am glad the author brought this case to light and shows that the government does go back and try to right wrongs. Even when it is their own employees who are the ones abusing the power.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Capital Punishment in Texas
"Capital punishment should continue," is an article written by Mike Hashimoto of the Dallas news. In this article Hashimoto is arguing for keeping capital punishment in Texas. Hashimoto gives some strong opinion's for capital punishment. Hashimoto states that capital punishment is "the ulitmate punishment for crimes that demand finality" where as a criminals given a life sentence can still escape and cause more destruction. Also Hashimoto says that capital punishment "sends a powerful message" to detterent crime.
And finally Hashimoto concludes that capital punishment is applied fairly, accurately and sparingly. Hashimoto then lists some statics to prove his point about the fairness "U.S. Justice Department statistics found that black defendants were convicted of 51.5 percent of all murders but made up only 41.3 percent of death row populations. A white murderer, the study found, was about twice as likely to receive a death sentence as a black murderer. " I think this is a good article for pro stance on capital punishment. Hashimoto brings up good points and his article is easy to read and flows nicely.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/mhashimoto/stories/DN-deathhashimoto_15edi.ART.State.Edition1.42ce26c.html
And finally Hashimoto concludes that capital punishment is applied fairly, accurately and sparingly. Hashimoto then lists some statics to prove his point about the fairness "U.S. Justice Department statistics found that black defendants were convicted of 51.5 percent of all murders but made up only 41.3 percent of death row populations. A white murderer, the study found, was about twice as likely to receive a death sentence as a black murderer. " I think this is a good article for pro stance on capital punishment. Hashimoto brings up good points and his article is easy to read and flows nicely.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/mhashimoto/stories/DN-deathhashimoto_15edi.ART.State.Edition1.42ce26c.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)