Back when I was taking a legal studies class in high school, we would always make the joke that "everything crazy happened (at least law wise) in Texas." The number of odd Supreme Court decisions we read about from that state baffled me, and most of them involved guns. The crazy thing about them is the number of people who found legal justification to shoot other people, and some how get off scott-free.
However, some of this Texas-crazy has decided to migrate to other parts of the country. In september, a man named Dan Fredenberg decided he was going to try and find his wife, who was having a romantic fling with Brice Harper. When Fredenberg went to enter the garage of Harper's house, Harper shot him three times and left him to bleed out.
While this may look like a straight case for manslaughter, it is in fact under a new law called the Castle Law, allowing homeowners more power to protect themselves in their own homes, but arguably allows them to get away with killing others at the same time.
The idea behind this is absurd, for most places already have a self-defense clause within the law in order to stop innocent people from being convicted of serious crimes. But a blanket protection clause like this one has the propensity to be abused, and in this case Harper was not even charged by the state, so a jury did not even get to look at the case to see if the law applied.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Colleen Lachowicz
http://www.colbertnation.com/
This makes me a little upset. First off, really? You're going to campaign against someone using World of Warcraft? Colleen Lachowicz, a Democratic Senate candidate from Maine plays World of Warcraft and the Republican party is attacking her for it. The issue I find here is, on a personal level, I find it disturbing that someone can still be considered by some to be unfit for office for, in their free time, playing a video game. That would be the equivalent of the previous generation being unfit to serve for reading too many books. While I am a fan of video games myself, this brings up the age old question of whether or not personal lives should factor into whether or not a candidate is elected. When the activity in question is literally practiced by millions of people around the world, and is equally prolific within the US, it should not even be a question if a non illegal activity should bar someone or make them unfit to serve; it has no bearing what-so-ever.
This makes me a little upset. First off, really? You're going to campaign against someone using World of Warcraft? Colleen Lachowicz, a Democratic Senate candidate from Maine plays World of Warcraft and the Republican party is attacking her for it. The issue I find here is, on a personal level, I find it disturbing that someone can still be considered by some to be unfit for office for, in their free time, playing a video game. That would be the equivalent of the previous generation being unfit to serve for reading too many books. While I am a fan of video games myself, this brings up the age old question of whether or not personal lives should factor into whether or not a candidate is elected. When the activity in question is literally practiced by millions of people around the world, and is equally prolific within the US, it should not even be a question if a non illegal activity should bar someone or make them unfit to serve; it has no bearing what-so-ever.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Voter ID Law
While I already wrote my article on this, I wanted to express what I personally felt about these laws and how they will affect all of America.
I would like to state, first and foremost, that this is not a bipartisan issue. This should not be Republicans vs. Democrats, despite the overwhelming amount of ID laws being passed by republican congresses. If the situation were to reverse, and the Democrats were desperately drying to get their candidate elected, if the supreme court lets these laws stand, Democrats will do the exact same thing.
These laws are infringing on one of the things we hold most dear in America, our vote, and restricting who can vote, even if only through subtle and minute ways, is a recipe for disaster. And while voter ID laws do have their place, the way Connecticut is doing it makes the most sense. They are offering free voter ID's that will be valid basically for the purpose of voting only (possibly other government documents) and are implementing it AFTER the election. This way, people have at least two whole years before the next round of federal elections to acquire one of these free ID's, instead of taxing the DMV's way over what they could possibly do to get photo ID's for the thousands who would need it in the next month.
I would like to state, first and foremost, that this is not a bipartisan issue. This should not be Republicans vs. Democrats, despite the overwhelming amount of ID laws being passed by republican congresses. If the situation were to reverse, and the Democrats were desperately drying to get their candidate elected, if the supreme court lets these laws stand, Democrats will do the exact same thing.
These laws are infringing on one of the things we hold most dear in America, our vote, and restricting who can vote, even if only through subtle and minute ways, is a recipe for disaster. And while voter ID laws do have their place, the way Connecticut is doing it makes the most sense. They are offering free voter ID's that will be valid basically for the purpose of voting only (possibly other government documents) and are implementing it AFTER the election. This way, people have at least two whole years before the next round of federal elections to acquire one of these free ID's, instead of taxing the DMV's way over what they could possibly do to get photo ID's for the thousands who would need it in the next month.
My Relationship to the News
I am a child of my time: I certainly grew up in a digital era and my relationship with the news reflects that. I get the vast majority of my information about the world around me from the internet, and even the TV news that I watch is usually streamed (I don't even have a cable hookup in my dorm).
For the most part, I receive my news from two different people, Brian Williams and Jon Stewart (and by extension Stephen Colbert). While I usually watch Williams because that is the network my family would always turn on at dinner time, Jon Stewart was something I picked up on my own. While he hooked me with his political humor, what struck me was how topical he was and how what he was actually saying was really informative. But what struck home that this "comedy show" could and should be taken seriously is when the 9/11 first responders were not being granted health care by the government despite the medical ailments the had due to their heroic actions. And almost no one was covering it. But Stewart brought on a group of first responders and did an interview with them that nearly single-handedly helped that bill pass through congress. My uncle was nearly killed in the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon (a lucky traffic jam saved his life, his office was completely destroyed) so this may hit a little closer to home for that, but on that day Jon Stewart earned my trust as an established Journalist and my respect as a human being.
My relationship with journalism is a little different from most, in that I first got into through my photography and the writing came after. I view things from that angle a lot of the time, and putting together an article that didn't belong in the entertainment section was difficult for me at least at the beginning of this semester, probably because of all the time I spent as entertainment editor of my high schools paper. My ideal goal is to eventually become a photo-journalist who travels the world taking pictures of serene landscapes exotic animals and even more exotic cultures. The life of a behind-the-desk journalist doesn't really appeal to me very much (though, granted, I don't think it appeals to many others, either), and a job as either a photographer for a paper/online publication/ photographer in general would be fine.
For the most part, I receive my news from two different people, Brian Williams and Jon Stewart (and by extension Stephen Colbert). While I usually watch Williams because that is the network my family would always turn on at dinner time, Jon Stewart was something I picked up on my own. While he hooked me with his political humor, what struck me was how topical he was and how what he was actually saying was really informative. But what struck home that this "comedy show" could and should be taken seriously is when the 9/11 first responders were not being granted health care by the government despite the medical ailments the had due to their heroic actions. And almost no one was covering it. But Stewart brought on a group of first responders and did an interview with them that nearly single-handedly helped that bill pass through congress. My uncle was nearly killed in the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon (a lucky traffic jam saved his life, his office was completely destroyed) so this may hit a little closer to home for that, but on that day Jon Stewart earned my trust as an established Journalist and my respect as a human being.
My relationship with journalism is a little different from most, in that I first got into through my photography and the writing came after. I view things from that angle a lot of the time, and putting together an article that didn't belong in the entertainment section was difficult for me at least at the beginning of this semester, probably because of all the time I spent as entertainment editor of my high schools paper. My ideal goal is to eventually become a photo-journalist who travels the world taking pictures of serene landscapes exotic animals and even more exotic cultures. The life of a behind-the-desk journalist doesn't really appeal to me very much (though, granted, I don't think it appeals to many others, either), and a job as either a photographer for a paper/online publication/ photographer in general would be fine.
Iran Duped by The Onion
Well its 6:18 in the morning and its no time like the present to crank out a post.or two
http://www.wmur.com/news/national/The-Onion-dupes-Iran-s-news-agency/-/9857926/16781434/-/9wg2o4z/-/index.html
This lovely article comes from WMUR, and shows the hilarious situation of an Iranian news agency thinking that the onion was a legitimate news source. Several US news outlets have also fallen into this trap, Fox news a notable offender, putting an article of theirs on the front page of the Fox website, with equally hilarious results. This is the reason you always check your sources, because this can happen to anybody if they aren't careful, and if you are caught posting something like an onion story about Ahmadinejad is more popular with white Americans than Barack Obama, you will probably never be taken seriously again.
http://www.wmur.com/news/national/The-Onion-dupes-Iran-s-news-agency/-/9857926/16781434/-/9wg2o4z/-/index.html
This lovely article comes from WMUR, and shows the hilarious situation of an Iranian news agency thinking that the onion was a legitimate news source. Several US news outlets have also fallen into this trap, Fox news a notable offender, putting an article of theirs on the front page of the Fox website, with equally hilarious results. This is the reason you always check your sources, because this can happen to anybody if they aren't careful, and if you are caught posting something like an onion story about Ahmadinejad is more popular with white Americans than Barack Obama, you will probably never be taken seriously again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)