Regardless of bans, guns will get gotten.

I read “A response to Chicago Mayor Daley’s Recent Anti-Gun Arguments”.  The anonymous author does not need to specify the social significance so much, because it is an issue that has received much attention, especially in the last couple decades. Regardless of the need to specify, the title itself and the first paragraph make it completely relevant to the citizens of Chicago. He then goes on to make it a nationwide issue by revealing that “between 1/3 and ½ of all homes in America lawfully have guns.” The author rebuts the numerous arguments made by the mayor, several of which displayed his lack of knowledge in the subject. In conclusion, the author says, “a person who is willing to commit a serious crime such as murder or robbery will have no compunction about violating a gun ban law… The result is that the criminals are still armed, and the law abiding citizens (who weren’t going to commit a crime in the first place) are now disarmed, which makes them easier targets.”

http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/07/27/a-response-to-chicago-mayor-daleys-recent-anti-gun-arguments/

Dependable and Steadfast is Pretty Good Stuff

Movie Review.
Title: ‘Runaway Bride’: Pretty Woman is Back; but Now She’s Cautious
Author: Janet Maslin

Dependable and Steadfast is Pretty Good Stuff

What do moviegoers look for in a film today? A question explored as we examine Janet Maslin New York Times film review. A film reviewers’ clout, through leading publications' wide range influence, is capable of either enticing or put off a readers desire to ultimately purchase or view a film. The New York Times is a renowned publication within the nations’ largest hub of entertainment. This publication reached an estimated 57 million online readers in the third quarter of 2006 (nytimes 2).

The “The Runaway Bride” film portrays a New York, USA Today newspaper journalist, Ike Graham (Richard Gere) and a Maryland country hardware store clerk, Maggie Carpenter (Julia Roberts), known as the “runaway bride.” Maggie’s quirky reputation for leaving a trail of would be grooms at the altar is the pivotal theme. When Ike publishes an article about Maggie, conflict between Ike and Maggie ensues, a situation that leads to their budding romance and ultimate marriage.

Maslin contrasts this PG rated, romantic comedy film “The Runaway Bride” as an exact opposite counterpart to that of its predecessor with the same famous female/male stars as “Pretty Woman.” Maslin critiques the film as, “More often, the film is like a ride through a car wash: forward motion, familiar phases in the same old order and a sense of being carried along steadily on a well-used track. It works without exactly showing signs of life” (Maslin 1). At first glance, this metaphor might seem a negative report when in fact it positions the film as desirable to particular audiences, as it is deemed reliably entertaining, with no big surprises. Many prospective viewers may find this element more appealing than the unexpected. The critique combines sporadic structure and a descriptive intriguing style with its flowery, adjective profuse diction and imagery. Maslin further describes the film as one slow in progressing to the interest sustaining stage, that is, about half way into the movie. As the plot continues, the film is defined as increasingly sustaining viewer interest, when the main characters shine in their starring roles, illuminating the supporting characters in their glow.

Works Cited
1. Janet Maslin The New York Times on the Web. Movie Review.
Title: ‘Runaway Bride’: Pretty Woman is Back; but Now She’s Cautious
http://www.m1ovietome.com/pages/tracking/index.php?ref_id=275747&tid=7
2.http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/business/media/31paper.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=New%20York%20Times%20circulation%20data&st=cse

Octumom

In decades past, to have a big family was not uncommon, nor was caring for your big family questioned by society. Enter Nayda Suleman, the mother from Whitter Ca who had 6 children and had octuplets in January 2009. Now "the octu-spectacle wont go away", there are daily stories about this mother and her ability to care for all 14 children, the newborns are still in the hospital, which concerns as to if the babies will be released in her care. Sit and ask why does society care about this mom, here is one answer from Harvey Levin of TMZ as quoted in LA Tines, "Octomom is crazy. People like crazy. Crazy in more interesting than boring. It's that simple." There are so many out there that have opinions about this mother being on public assistance, her home in pre-foreclosure, the doctor preforming invitro and the 911 tapes released to prove the fact that she is unfit to raise her children. "When Kaiser Permanente hospital officials questioned her ability to take care of the octuplets, he was the doctor she called in distress.", referring to Dr. Phil with whom she did an interview with that took over two days of air time. With so many people against a woman having large family and questioning her ability to care for them, it should stop and make us think, how did families decades ago care for their large family? Forty years ago spousal and child abuse/neglect were not openly spoken of, and if their were laws they were not enforced. Especially in smaller communities where most would just mind their own business and not get involved. The authors of this LA Times article may have a lot of views and quotes about how the single mother of a large family, but in the end, only a mother can love 14 children and what is in her heart is not open to the public, after reading this article, octu mom has the right to have a large family, unless she breaks a law, and at this point she has not. As she said to Dr. Phil, "I am no one special."

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-et-octuplets28-2009feb28,0,4834818.story?track=rss

Holding Mr. Bashir Accountable

I chose an article written in the New York Times called "Holding Mr. Bashir Accountable." The anonymous author makes a strong argument that Omar Hassan al-Bashir, President of Sudan, should be held accountable for his war crimes and that Obama, the UN and other countries should help with the situation. "He [Obama] should encourage China to stop supplying the weapons wielded by Khartoum’s army and militias and call on the rest of the world to tighten sanctions on Mr. Bashir’s cronies in hopes that they will finally oust him."
The author establishes social significance by providing strong, convicting evidence against Bashir. The author shows that Bashir has committed violent crimes against the people of Sudan and is very straight forward in stating what he/she thinks needs to be done with him.
"The judges [of the International Criminal Court] said that Sudan’s president played an “essential role” in the murder, rape, torture and displacement of large numbers of civilians in Dar fur."
The Author basically stated at the end what he/she believes Obama should do, but the requests of action are pretty strong. He/she says that Obama should send troops over to Sudan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/opinion/07sat2.html?ref=todayspaper

"How to Stop the Drug Wars"

In the website article, "How to Stop the Drug Wars," the author argues that making drugs illegal is doing more harm than good. The author goes on to argue that the costly strategies nations have been using since 1909 is not effective, and never has been. This article is written due to Mexico's fight against drugs. The author writes, "In Mexico more than 800 policemen and soldiers have been killed since December 2006 (and the annual overall death toll is running at over 6,000)." The author makes it clear that making illegal drugs legal is not the best idea, but it is the "least bad." The author makes points by stating facts, quoting politicians, and poking weakness in statements made against the ban on drugs.
This article was very interesting to me. By making drugs legal there would be a collapse in drug wars, and deaths caused by drug wars. Yet, making drugs such as cocaine and heroine legal just seems so wrong. This situation is so complex. The only thing I can agree with the author about is that the drug system nations have made over the years is not working, and there needs to be a change before more people lose their lives.
Article link: http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13237193&source=hptextfeature

Slow Action, Smart Loan

Former governor Eloit Spitzer believes: “The long-term economic strength of the United States depends on our ability to compete in the world of intellectual capital.” In his article, “Lone Ranger,” for the online magazine, Slate.com, (http://www.slate.com/id/2212534/,) Spitzer disavows the barriers hindering an individual’s pursuit of higher education and the long term consequences of diminishing “American intellectual capital.” Spitzer appeals to authority, logic, and reasoning to support his stance on a proven, internationally successful loan program which he dubs, “smart loans.” First proposed and subsequently supported by two Nobel laureates, a government funded and monitored “smart loan” permits students to fund their education with a loan payback model based on a fixed percentage of their subsequent income – regardless of what that may be. Students who received “smart loans” would free to pursue socially desirable jobs, such as teaching, in place of high paying jobs that simply qualify because of their astronomical monthly tuition/loan payments. I agree with Spitzer's assertion that “education is a social good that receives inadequate investment.” Furthermore, “[A smart loan] removes a significant barrier to education for the non-wealthy and it frees employment decisions from the yoke of pure income maximization.” The “smart loan” was tested at Yale University in the late 1970’s and ultimately scrubbed-but not before a law student named William Jefferson Clinton was able to take advantage of the loan model’s benefits. Bill Clinton invested his intellectual capital in to a successful run for president: evidence that “making higher education universally available is worth the attention of the Obama administration and congress.”

Silly Sheriff

In the article author Kathleen Parker argues the “ silliness” of laws and why law enforcement should focus more on the important crimes being broken, than insensible drug acts. Using Michael Phelps recent marijuana incident as the prime example of why law enforcement and Kellogg are so silly. Parker states, “So seems the message from Kellogg, which has decided not to renew its sponsorship contract with Michael Phelps after the Olympian was photographed smoking marijuana at a party in South Carolina.That's showbiz, of course, but the cereal and munchie company had no problem signing Phelps despite a prior alcohol-related arrest” (par 1&2). Parker speaks of one sheriff in particular Leon Lott of South Carolina, he is spending too much time on the Phelps case rather than breaking down crime in one of the, “ nations most dangerous states in the nation”(par 5). Some of the cases that are being put aside are child pornography and rape to name a few, “Last year Human Rights Watch reported that as many as 400,000 rape kits containing evidence were sitting unopened in criminal labs and storage facilities” (par 9). Phelps case was a victimless act that is turning into to a huge ordeal and taking time away from solving the more serious crimes. Parker concludes with, “I'm not convinced that all drugs should be legalized, but we should at least put prohibition on the table to take another look. In the meantime, Sheriff Lott has some 'splainin' do to” (par 15).
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/02/15/opinion/parker/z3d1b98937f4e731b8825755c00030f5d.txt