While searching for a classmate's article to comment on I came across an article in Bob Law's Law blog about a bill that increases the amount of restitution paid to wrongly convicted individuals that serve prison sentences. Under the current laws wrongly convicted individual are only compensated $50,000 per year of prison they serve, the new law would pay $80,000 per year along with some other benefits.
I completely agree with my classmate in supporting this bill, however i believe our government should pay even more. If an individual can sue McDonald's for millions of dollars when they spill hot coffee on themselves one time, imagine how much someone should get for spending countless years in prison for nothing. A coffee burn is a temporary thing, however a prison sentence might last for a decade or more.
When my classmate states "it would be much better if the DA's who are responsible for the convictions were also held accountable in some way," it brings to mind a question. How did the wrongful conviction happen? If there was foul play involved then yes I agree, the district attorney that is responsible should be punished. However if they are wrongly convicted because the evidence at the time demonstrates that they are guilty then I would have to say that nothing should happen. It is the district attorney's job to present a case proving someones guilt, if that is what the evidence points to at that time then they should not be punished for doing their job.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Pig Sickness
With the grand fear of a national pandemic coursing through peoples minds and Texas’ close proximity to Mexico, it is no wonder that swine flu is receiving the majority of attention from every news source in the state of Texas. All this outrage is causing the state’s local governments to overreact and feed the ever growing monster that came from Mexico. So far there has only been one confirmed death in Texas, also the only one in the entire United States, caused by H1N1, otherwise known as swine influenza. Is this single death really causing all this madness? There have only been six confirmed cases of H1N1 in Texas, a state with 24 million plus inhabitants. To me those seem like pretty weak statistics compared to all the attention swine flu is receiving from various school districts in Texas.
Is all the fear due to the fact that swine flu is relatively uncommon in humans and people are freaking out because they are ill-informed about this strain of influenza? Possibly, however they should fear not because according to the Center for Disease Control there are a couple of different medicines that do effectively treat H1N1. More likely though, I believe that the actions taken by many different governing bodies in the state of Texas is only playing to the crowd and essentially making the situation worse. Closing multiple school districts for an “outbreak” of six cases of swine flu is a little outrageous. This is only reinforcing people’s fears because it is rare that schools close because of an illness.
All in all Texas, and the U.S., is doing more harm than good. Instead of reinforcing people’s fears they should be suppressing them with the facts. From what I have read swine flu is just a different strain of the common flu that hundreds of thousands of Americans become infected with every year, accordingly H1N1 should not be built up more than necessary.
Is all the fear due to the fact that swine flu is relatively uncommon in humans and people are freaking out because they are ill-informed about this strain of influenza? Possibly, however they should fear not because according to the Center for Disease Control there are a couple of different medicines that do effectively treat H1N1. More likely though, I believe that the actions taken by many different governing bodies in the state of Texas is only playing to the crowd and essentially making the situation worse. Closing multiple school districts for an “outbreak” of six cases of swine flu is a little outrageous. This is only reinforcing people’s fears because it is rare that schools close because of an illness.
All in all Texas, and the U.S., is doing more harm than good. Instead of reinforcing people’s fears they should be suppressing them with the facts. From what I have read swine flu is just a different strain of the common flu that hundreds of thousands of Americans become infected with every year, accordingly H1N1 should not be built up more than necessary.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Response to classmate's blog
While sifting through my classmate's articles I came across Bob Law's article about trans-fats. In the article Mr. Law makes an argument in favor of a bill that would ban restaurants, in the state of Texas, from selling foods with trans-fats. I do agree that banning trans-fats in restaurants could help reduce the obesity level in our state. However, I believe this would be a great infringement on our freedom. Yes it would be wise for restaurants to have nutritional information available to the public so they can make an educated decision on what to eat, but for the government to make a decision for the consumer is absurd. If the government is going to ban trans-fats then they might as well ban tobacco because it caused cancer, ban alcohol because it can cause kidney disease, and ban products containing lead because it is thought to cause birth defects. It should be up to the individual what they eat, if they chose to eat unhealthy then so be it. I do not believe that our society's increasing obesity levels are the fault of the food industry. There are healthy alternatives to fried chicken. The majority of obesity is a personal choice, it is not the fault of anyone other than the individual. Banning trans-fats in restaurants isn't going to change the fact that people are not willing to put forth the effort to be healthy.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Guns on Campus
On April 16, 2007, a student at the University of Virginia Tech went on a shooting spree, killing 32 before finally taking his own life. This tragic day proved to be the very worst shooting that has occurred to date at an American college. However the Virginia Tech massacre is not the only instance of a gunman killing innocent students and teachers at an institution of higher education. This incident was only one of more than a half dozen that have occurred since the early 1990’s.
With the tragic Virginia Tech shooting still remaining in people’s minds, it is no wonder that pieces of pro-gun legislation have surfaced in Texas’ 81st legislature session regarding firearms on college campuses. Currently HB 1893 and SB 1164, if passed, would allow licensed individuals to legally carry concealed handguns on campuses of institutions of higher education in the state of Texas.
The only state that currently allows guns on college campuses is Utah. Last year 17 different states presented similar legislation and it failed in every case. It is no surprise that allowing guns on college campuses is a very debatable topic. However, I cannot see a logical reason against licensed carry on campuses of higher education. One common argument against guns on campus is that teachers and administrators alike would be fearful of every student who is upset by a bad grade or questionable policy. To me this idea is ridiculous. First off, the majority of college students are under the age of 21, which is the legal minimum age required for a concealed handgun permit in the state of Texas. Therefore, HB 1893 and SB 1164 are more likely to affect the professors than the student body. Secondly, if a student is willing to shoot a teacher over a bad grade then I seriously doubt that the student is going to be deterred because guns are not allowed on campus. People are going to do what they want regardless of the law. Another argument is that shootings and gun related accidents would increase on college campuses if guns are permitted on them. I don’t quite believe this would be the result. Currently Texas citizens can legally carry firearms in all public places not licensed to sell alcohol, with a few other exceptions. This amounts to a large number of public places. In these carry-friendly places you do not see scenes that resemble the wild west where handguns are being discharged on every corner. Rather these places, such as malls and bookstores, are relatively quiet and safe. I believe college campuses would be no different. There are approximately 24 million citizens in the state of Texas, of that only about 315,000 have concealed handgun licenses. I do not believe that there would be a huge influx of guns on to college campuses, it would be a very small percentage.
To me this issue is a no-brainer. Why on earth would the state of Texas want to prevent law abiding citizens from protecting their own life and the lives of loved ones? I cannot possible conceive a reason why. If properly licensed college students and teachers had been allowed to carry handguns at Virginia Tech then the gunman might not have inflicted as much damage as he did. Lives could have been saved.
With the tragic Virginia Tech shooting still remaining in people’s minds, it is no wonder that pieces of pro-gun legislation have surfaced in Texas’ 81st legislature session regarding firearms on college campuses. Currently HB 1893 and SB 1164, if passed, would allow licensed individuals to legally carry concealed handguns on campuses of institutions of higher education in the state of Texas.
The only state that currently allows guns on college campuses is Utah. Last year 17 different states presented similar legislation and it failed in every case. It is no surprise that allowing guns on college campuses is a very debatable topic. However, I cannot see a logical reason against licensed carry on campuses of higher education. One common argument against guns on campus is that teachers and administrators alike would be fearful of every student who is upset by a bad grade or questionable policy. To me this idea is ridiculous. First off, the majority of college students are under the age of 21, which is the legal minimum age required for a concealed handgun permit in the state of Texas. Therefore, HB 1893 and SB 1164 are more likely to affect the professors than the student body. Secondly, if a student is willing to shoot a teacher over a bad grade then I seriously doubt that the student is going to be deterred because guns are not allowed on campus. People are going to do what they want regardless of the law. Another argument is that shootings and gun related accidents would increase on college campuses if guns are permitted on them. I don’t quite believe this would be the result. Currently Texas citizens can legally carry firearms in all public places not licensed to sell alcohol, with a few other exceptions. This amounts to a large number of public places. In these carry-friendly places you do not see scenes that resemble the wild west where handguns are being discharged on every corner. Rather these places, such as malls and bookstores, are relatively quiet and safe. I believe college campuses would be no different. There are approximately 24 million citizens in the state of Texas, of that only about 315,000 have concealed handgun licenses. I do not believe that there would be a huge influx of guns on to college campuses, it would be a very small percentage.
To me this issue is a no-brainer. Why on earth would the state of Texas want to prevent law abiding citizens from protecting their own life and the lives of loved ones? I cannot possible conceive a reason why. If properly licensed college students and teachers had been allowed to carry handguns at Virginia Tech then the gunman might not have inflicted as much damage as he did. Lives could have been saved.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Sobriety Checkpoints: A future possibility
The opinion article I chose “The Best Sobriety Checkpoint Bill I Ever Opposed” posted by Scott Henson identifies and outlines a current bill, SB 298, in the Texas legislature. If SB 298, proposed by Senator John Carona, is passed it would allow sobriety checkpoints in the state of Texas. This bill also attempts to negate the current disadvantages seen in other state’s sobriety checkpoints.
Henson clearly expresses his opposition to all sobriety checkpoint laws regardless of their nature. He goes as far as relating sobriety checkpoints to communism. I can understand Henson’s disproval. Sobriety Checkpoints do seem a bit “Big Brother-esque,” as Henson stated. However, Henson declares that he does respect the attempts the bill makes on overcoming sobriety checkpoint downfalls, despite an overall disliking on principal alone. I agree that the elements of SB 298 would do a very good job of alleviating the negatives of sobriety checkpoints. In fact I agree with it so much that I would vote for this bill if given the chance.
In his post Henson makes one statement that I completely disagree with, “But if you think drunk driving is so bad that it warrants use of more totalitarian tactics…” It is the ‘so bad’ portion that bothers me. It is as if Henson is implying that drunk driving is not that big of a problem. According to statistics I found online Texas had 1544 alcohol related driving fatalities in 2006 which is the highest number of any state in the U.S., while Texas only had 1384 murders. This means that drunk driving is a bigger problem than murder. So therefore, I would have to say that drunk driving is a very big problem, not only to those who drink and drive but to all of the innocent people that are killed every year because of it.
All in all I support bill SB 298, despite some thinking that sobriety checkpoints are a little communist in nature. For me the benefits of sobriety checkpoints far outweigh the drawbacks.
Henson clearly expresses his opposition to all sobriety checkpoint laws regardless of their nature. He goes as far as relating sobriety checkpoints to communism. I can understand Henson’s disproval. Sobriety Checkpoints do seem a bit “Big Brother-esque,” as Henson stated. However, Henson declares that he does respect the attempts the bill makes on overcoming sobriety checkpoint downfalls, despite an overall disliking on principal alone. I agree that the elements of SB 298 would do a very good job of alleviating the negatives of sobriety checkpoints. In fact I agree with it so much that I would vote for this bill if given the chance.
In his post Henson makes one statement that I completely disagree with, “But if you think drunk driving is so bad that it warrants use of more totalitarian tactics…” It is the ‘so bad’ portion that bothers me. It is as if Henson is implying that drunk driving is not that big of a problem. According to statistics I found online Texas had 1544 alcohol related driving fatalities in 2006 which is the highest number of any state in the U.S., while Texas only had 1384 murders. This means that drunk driving is a bigger problem than murder. So therefore, I would have to say that drunk driving is a very big problem, not only to those who drink and drive but to all of the innocent people that are killed every year because of it.
All in all I support bill SB 298, despite some thinking that sobriety checkpoints are a little communist in nature. For me the benefits of sobriety checkpoints far outweigh the drawbacks.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Opposition to the Stimulus Package
The editorial article I chose published by the Corpus Christi Caller Times discusses the new stimulus package that was recently passed and Governor Rick Perry’s reaction to it. In the article the author states that “Governor Rick Perry’s reluctance to take the $17 billion allotted to the state doesn’t inspire great confidence that the money will be used effectively to help Texans or to help stimulate the economy.” The author blames the continued negativity by the Governor on next year’s election. I’m not sure such is the case or if it is that Perry just likes to whine. I am personally tired of hearing it, even before the stimulus package was passed Governor Perry clearly voiced his opposition to it. I understand that Perry along with many other oppose the package, the fact is that it was passed and there is nothing that can change that. I believe that Perry’s continued resistance is doing nothing to help Texas. Instead Perry should be focused on the job at hand which is to figure out how to best utilize the $ 17 billion allotted to Texas. However, I agree with Perry that we should be careful of entering into government programs that would burden our state with expenses long after our funding has dried up. Instead Texas should try to spend the money on one time expenses such as improving our roadways.
The author also state that “the stimulus bill isn't perfect and it is a huge risk, but it's a risk that Obama, Congress and the nation had to take.” This is exactly right; something had to be done to stop the landslide. The stimulus package might not be perfect but it is what we have now. As pointed out in the article Texas is faced with a $ 9 billion deficit, this deficit didn’t occur because of fluctuations in the market. It happened because of the economic crisis the U.S. is experiencing. The $17 billion stimulus for Texas could help us pull ourselves out of this hole and improve our faltering economy. But this will only happen if Perry and others can disregard their thoughts on the stimulus package and figure out the best way to use the money.
The author also state that “the stimulus bill isn't perfect and it is a huge risk, but it's a risk that Obama, Congress and the nation had to take.” This is exactly right; something had to be done to stop the landslide. The stimulus package might not be perfect but it is what we have now. As pointed out in the article Texas is faced with a $ 9 billion deficit, this deficit didn’t occur because of fluctuations in the market. It happened because of the economic crisis the U.S. is experiencing. The $17 billion stimulus for Texas could help us pull ourselves out of this hole and improve our faltering economy. But this will only happen if Perry and others can disregard their thoughts on the stimulus package and figure out the best way to use the money.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Perry Warns Texans
The big news story of today was President Obama’s signing of the $787 billion stimulus package, however not everyone is thrilled to see this passed. Texas Governor Rick Perry has previously voiced opposition to the stimulus package, and today when news broke of the signing about to take place Perry offered a warning to all Texans: be cautious with federal stimulus.
Governor Perry worries about the commitments that might come with taking money for certain programs. Perry states “we need the freedom to pick and choose. And we need the freedom to say 'No thanks.' ” While state officials still figure out what the stimulus bill means for Texas it is apparent that there is potentially some very beneficial aspects of the package. Texas could possibly receive $2.5 billion for transportation projects, however it is unclear at this time whether that will happen or not.
As the nuts and bolts of the stimulus package are unveiled it will be important for Texans to keep up with how it will affect our state. Although the economic down turn has not affected Texas as severely as other states the possibility still remains. However the money that Texas may receive from the stimulus package could stave off any further economic duress.
Governor Perry worries about the commitments that might come with taking money for certain programs. Perry states “we need the freedom to pick and choose. And we need the freedom to say 'No thanks.' ” While state officials still figure out what the stimulus bill means for Texas it is apparent that there is potentially some very beneficial aspects of the package. Texas could possibly receive $2.5 billion for transportation projects, however it is unclear at this time whether that will happen or not.
As the nuts and bolts of the stimulus package are unveiled it will be important for Texans to keep up with how it will affect our state. Although the economic down turn has not affected Texas as severely as other states the possibility still remains. However the money that Texas may receive from the stimulus package could stave off any further economic duress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
