Final Blog: Episteme, Techne, Phronesis and Metis

I enjoyed professor Ellerman's class for Law and Society. The open discussions really helped me become aware of issues outside of my own life and understand how other people from different backgrounds see things. I took this class before at Cosumnes river college a few years ago and noticed big differences. Basically, the class I took at CRC was boring and I noticed that Professor Ellerman really wants his students to participate in the class and express their opinion. This may be why I lost interest in the class at CRC and dropped it. For the record, I never missed one day of law and society this semester so I suppose there is a reason why.

 I think Ellerman's approach for this class was effective and proved to teach things that people may not realize exist in their daily lives. Most of all, in this class you can see how laws clash with society and Vice versa when you and others are creating/discussing laws. Every person in society has a different idea of how things should work yet, whether or not we agree we still have to abide by these laws. Discussing these things with others helped me realize why these laws are in place to begin even though I may not personally agree with them.

Episteme: I learned a lot about relevant law subjects that are controversial currently such as "stand your ground", Structures of government, and stupid laws (California:No vehicle without a driver may exceed 60 miles per hour?). I also got a better understanding of what the constitution consists of and why it makes it great to be a citizen in this country as opposed to other countries.

Techne: I was surprised that I never missed a class. Did I learn to be punctual? I have had years of work experience and with that being said I have worked with many people but it was different than a work environment because at work we are not suppose to talk about issues that people feel strongly about. Many people feel so strongly about these issues that it creates problems and people simply can't work together. The subjects that are not allowed to be brought up at work are allowed in class and I appreciate the fact that everyone in class was polite and respectful to others opinions both in class and on the blogs. It is interesting to see people speak freely about their opinions on these confusing and troubling issues that cannot be spoken about outside of class.

Phronesis: When we watched "This emotional Life" I could feel many of the people's passion and heartache. It is interesting to see how much other's go through all over the country (and world). Sometimes I would begin to think "Do these people know how great they are?' or "Does this person realize how much they are hurting themselves/loved ones?". Some of the tragedies really hit home and I could imagine that at one point or another everyone in the class felt empathetic for the people on the show.

Metis:I think there should be more to do with the Nation state game. Given that the subject to learn is street smarts I think that there should be more reasons to trade and more reasons to go to war. After all, life consists of many battles to fight and many things to be gained so it would be good if perhaps there were a little bit more going on. I liked the natural disasters and the efforts groups had to make to build a wonder but once these things have been taken out there is no motivation to trade or go to war.

looking back......I enjoyed the class and would take it again if I could. It was both enjoyable and a great opportunity to learn about current events, laws, nature of government and the people that make society.

CISPA

Before I choose to return to college, this past fall 2011, I already had a fairly poor opinion on what and how our elected government officials, from local all the way to the president of our country, did the jobs we (US citizens) elected them to do. Since my return to college several of my courses have opened my eyes even more to politics. Now things like:  falling asleep to infomercials and late night TV, dreaming up new wonderful things to add to my “happy place”, the phrase “make the bad people go away”, and pondering things such as: is our nation empire going to fall in mine or my kids life time, why did I have kids, what countries might I be interested in moving to and so on, are a part of my daily life, AHHHHH!!!! Thanks a lot college! All kidding aside though, I am truly clueless as to what to do and what to think.

When I turned 18 and could vote I didn’t understand why my mom and dad pushed and pretty much insisted that I register to vote as well as actually doing it. I thought it was stupid because how could my one vote really make a difference and if what or who I voted for didn’t win then I was still stuck with something I didn’t want in turn leading me back to the 1^st argument of what did my one little vote count for anyway. I had a bad attitude, like many Americans, close to my age and era did and I believe still do.

“One of the most critical ways that individuals can influence governmental decision-making is through voting.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, recognizes the integral role that transparent and open elections play in ensuring the fundamental right to participatory government. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Article 21 states:
Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his/her country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot or by equivalent free voting procedures.” (University of Minnesota Human Rights Center)

CISPA, SOPA, PIPA sound like words a 3 yr. old might make up while eating alphabet soup but they are federal legislation bills that Congress has been trying to pass. SOPA and PIPA were bills that Congress attempted to pass with the stated intention of stopping reproduction of copyrighted materials. CISPA, a new and similarly scrutinized bill, which takes away our online privacy (supposedly to protect Americans against “cyber-crimes”) has passed through the House of Representatives and is on its way to the Senate. 

If passed, CISPA would amend the National Security Act of 1947  to allow government agencies to swap customer data from Internet service providers and websites if that data is a threat to "cyber-security." On a basic level the bill is meant to provide a means for companies and the government to share information with one another to fight against cyber threats. We already had a perfectly functional model that's been in place for 15 yrs for law enforcement to share 'Cybersecurity' info with companies. ”In 1997, long-time FBI agent Dan Larkin helped set up a non-profit based in Pittsburgh that “functions as a conduit between private industry and law enforcement.” Its industry members, which include banks, ISPs, telcos, credit card companies, pharmaceutical companies, and others can hand over cyberthreat information to the non-profit, called the National Cyber Forensics and Training Alliance (NCFTA),which has a legal agreement with the government that allows it to then hand over info to the FBI.Conveniently, the FBI has a unit, the Cyber Initiative and Resource Fusion Unit, stationed in the NCFTA’s office. Companies can share information with the 501(c)6 non-profit that they would be wary of (or prohibited from) sharing directly with the FBI.”(Hill) This means, either that the Congressional authors and supporters of this bill were completely ignorant of this or CISPA is really meant to sneak through something worse. Neither makes CISPA or its supporters look very good.

One of the more concerning aspects of CISPA that sets it apart from SOPA/PIPA is the number of technology companies that support it; one of the key points that backers of CISPA have made throughout the debate on the bill. Facebook re-pledged its support, however has stated that the bill needs to be fixed to address privacy concerns. It would make more sense to pull your support until the bill is fixed instead of re-pledging your support.  Similarly, Microsoft is now admitting that there are some privacy concerns with CISPA and has softened its stance on it slightly, while not completely pulling its support. Declan McCullagh at CNET reports, “In response to queries from CNET, Microsoft, which has long been viewed as a supporter of the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, said this evening that any law must allow "us to honor the privacy and security promises we make to our customers." Microsoft added that it wants to "ensure the final legislation helps to tackle the real threat of cybercrime while protecting consumer privacy." What sparked significant privacy worries is the section of CISPA that says "notwithstanding any other provision of law," companies may share information "with any other entity, including the federal government." It doesn't, however, require them to do so.

Professor Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the world wide web, is warning consumers of his creation against Google and Facebook, as well as the government’s attempts to censor the Internet. In his interview with the Guardian he is quoted, "[It] is threatening the rights of people in America, and effectively rights everywhere, because what happens in America tends to affect people all over the world,” he says of CISPA. “Even though the SOPA and PIPA acts were stopped by huge public outcry, it's staggering how quickly the US government has come back with a new, different, threat to the rights of its citizens."(rt.com) Rep. Ron Paul, warned on April 23 that CISPA represents the "latest assault on Internet freedom" and was "Big Brother writ large."

One of the dozen amendments the House added right before passing the bill is: H.AMDT.1022 to H.R.3523 Amendment to limit government use of shared cyber threat information to only 5 purposes: (1) cybersecurity; (2) investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crimes; (3) protection of individuals from the danger of death or physical injury; (4) protection of minors from physical or psychological harm; and (5) protection of the national security of the United States. (The Library of Congress) Reps. Rogers and Ruppersberger say their bill is necessary to deal with threats from China and Russia and that it "protects privacy by prohibiting the government from requiring private sector entities to provide information." In addition, they stress that "no new authorities are granted to the Department of Defense or the intelligence community to direct private or public sector cybersecurity efforts." Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for "cybersecurity" or "national security" purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA. Somehow, incredibly, this was described as limiting CISPA, but it accomplishes the exact opposite.

This is violating our4^th Admendment rights because it offers a simple, warrantless means to acquire personal data and using the data to investigate and build cases against American citizens without regard for the laws that would normally protect their privacy. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a "cybersecurity crime". The government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened. CISPA is now a completely unsupportable bill that rewrites (and effectively eliminates) all privacy laws for any situation that involves a computer and is now an explicit attack on the freedoms of every American.

You have been an awesome professor and have taught me things I didn’t expect to learn in taking this class. Having to write this blog post and reflect on this semester has made me realize I learned more than I thought I had. This has been my favorite class to come to and I have felt so comfortable; that it has made for a more positive learning experience. The time always went by quickly and left me excited and looking forward to coming week after week. I have a 3 hour business class that compared to this one feels more like 6 hours and I can’t wait to get out and go home.

Episteme

I have a broader and better understanding about the laws that govern us, our rights as humans, and the powers that make up our government. Learning about our rights and what it means to have those rights is an extremely important bit of knowledge that I don’t think is taught enough to us as we grow up. Without this knowledge it makes it hard to function in society.

Techne

Working in our blog groups was a fun and positive experience and where I learned and grew the most. Working with others and depending on and trusting them to do their part is a hard thing to do. Once we all started to get to know each other and everyone showed that we were each committed to putting in the work expected of us it got a lot easier. We

Phronesis

I learned so much in this area. Social skills and emotional intelligence factors are a major part in what shapes the communities, states and country we live in. Laws are created and influenced by social issues all the time and what cause a need for those laws.

Metis

When it comes to being part of society and co-existing with people it takes more than acquired book knowledge, You have to be savvy and cunning to influence and negoiate what you want. Just because someone looks smart on paper doesn’t make them smarter than the hustler who is a high school dropout. When going out in the world and trying to apply what they have learned from books you have to have be able to work with others and a lot of that comes from “street smarts”

Thank you for an enjoyable and positive learning experience this semester!!

Final Blog

First of all I would like to thank Professor Ellerman, Andrew, and My Empire for probably one of the most entertaining, yet knowledgeable classes I have yet to take in my infinite quest for knowledge.

Pertaining to what I have learned in the class, I feel that with regard to Episteme I know have the knowledge of the constitution and laws to a greater level having actually researched it and writing my own Constitution.

 As far as Techne is concerned, I know now how to blog and use You Tube! I have learned so much from the video clips from class and have a greater understanding as how to use technology to my advantage.

Phronesis.... What can I say? Watching "This Emotional Life" no matter how outdated it was was to say the least educational. It really made me think about so many topics pertaining to relationships and interpersonal skills. I would have actually watched more of it, both in class and if I had the opportunity at home.

And finally Metis... To say the least the Nation State Game is cutting edge, and entertaining. This class gets so much "street cred" from me. I have taken other classes with Professor Ellerman that I have also thoroughly enjoyed. I would highly recommend this class to any of my fellow schoolmates.

Final Blog I would like to acknowldge that your class is the first class in my college career that I did not miss one class, the reason is because I was excited every week for the new information we would discuss. Episteme, I enjoyed reading the constitution, the last time I read the constitution was when I took government in highschool, which was over a decade ago. Therefore, it was new information. I enjoyed the way in which we learned the content in your class may differnet ways, through reading, video, and the news paper. This helped me retain the content. I enjoyed learning about differnt laws and right to bear arms. Techne, First, your class structure helped me learn how to use a blogging site, and how to email a spreadsheet. which I had no previous experience with before your class. I was the group leader which initially stressed me out. However, I adjusted quickly. I think I was codependent leader at first emailing people asking why they hadn't turned things in. Then after a couple weeks it was evident who was doing the work and who was not going to. I feel that I was able to accomplish a fear of mine in your class. I was able to allow my group to count on me to turn in there work if completed and leave the rest up to them. I definately learned new skills for working in a group. However I did find myself a little reserved. Which is differnt. Phronesis, I enjoyed watching the emotional life. Thank you for spreading it out over the semester. I was able to retain the information much easier than getting all the information at once. I think my group worked efficently with the free time at hand. I learned about compassion and acceptance, thanks to the emotional life. Metis, the NationState game was intersting and exciting. I apprecated how it was parallel to real life. The national disasters were like the curve balls we experience in real life. I found my self nervous and suspicous of everyone that was not in my group. I think the game help my group to bond and form comradery. It was interesting to see how each team handled it differently. Thank you!!

The empire Anthem Video

Here is the link for the Final presentation of "the Empire" anthem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYAHcjw2SjY&feature=youtu.be

FINAL BLOG

Thank you for this amazing class Professor Ellerman.  The fact that I was able to not just sit and "make it" through a three hour class, but truly enjoy this class, for me speaks louder than words.  I truly enjoyed your style of teaching evoking the students to participate in discussions.  This class was a unique experience and will be one of those classes that I will remember fondly.
EPISTEME- thank you for having us read The Constitution of the United States of America.  From that moment on when someone asked me if I had ever read the Constitutions and I said "Yes" I was no longer lying.  I enjoyed learning the difference between Federal Enumerated Powers and State Police Powers.
TECHNE- I enjoyed writing these blogs they are allot of fun.   I get to speak my mind and debate with people in a civil manner.  I get to see different peoples points of view without the cloud of judgement I would have face to face with someone.  I also learned how to work better with others and the importance of group dynamics.
PHRONESIS- I learned allot about my self in this area.  I have always been book smart and high functioning so whenever I get put into groups for any reason I always end up being overbearing and really in peoples face to get the task at hand done.  When put in groups with less then average ambitions I always end up doing most of the work and I get resentful at the group.  I saw this starting to play out in our group but after the midterm I found myself putting faith in my fellow country men and women.  I have found this to be an amazing experience because they have done a great job and I am not burnt out from doing all the work.  I have somehow been taught to chill-out(If you know me at all you will know how amazing that is).
METIS-The Nation State game was an unique experience.  I found the interacting with other nations to be very interesting and spoke to my mentality.  Every time some nation would want to trade or make a peace treaty I would always be incredibly suspicious.  So we went another route and became isolationist which costed us some law points.  This also reminded me the importance of relationships in all aspects of life.  I am a firm believer in the statement "Its not what you know its who you know."

My only criticism is that I wish we could of spent more time discussing issues.  I truly enjoyed our group discussions.

We the people of the empire,

marching victoriously

securing freedom from outside tyranny,

our nation represents individuality, integrity, and influence

WAIT A MINUTE.

YO-THAT'S WHACK.

THIS IS THE EMPIRE BITCH,

EM-EMPIRE BITCH,

EMPIRE BITCH,

EM-EMPIRE BITCH,

EMPIRE BITCH,

EM-EMPIRE BITCH,

CHECK YO'SELF BITCH.

Bill of Non-Rights.

1. Our Great Emperor is the head of state and church.
2. You are guilty unless deemed innocent.
3. Once charged with a crime you are to be held without bail.
4. You are always subject to search and seizure.
5. The Emperor will decree the tax rate.
6. Citizens a require to register weapons with the government.
7. Population control shall be in forced when needed.

Our Nation State

before last Thursday I thought our nation was doing really well.  Until that is that  I sat down at the War Table and saw the amount of law points that the other nations had.  We were well behind most nation's, which is expected just like the real world nations prosper by trade not Isolation.  Our leaders need to get together and come up with a new strategy and we need to be more proactive.  This is kind of hard because we are The Empire for f*@k sake so How willing to work with others can we be.  We really only can have one goal and that is to Rule The Galaxy!

The Empire....a totalitarian society

I think that our country is something similar to governments established in North Korea, soviet union or Nazi Germany during World War 2. Best way to describe it would be saying that it is something like George Orwell's book 1984 where the government controls every aspect of a citizen's life using tactics of terror and constant surveillance. I think it's fun interpreting the law in a fictional manner because we realize that we don't have to create or emulate laws that exist in our own lives and we can actually create something that is totally different than what we are used to. Seeing how laws effect a person's life directly I think we realize how fortunate we are to have the freedoms that we have. I definitely would not like to be a citizen of "the Empire" if it really existed.

There aren't any models that we are using for a plan on what we would like the empire to be. Everything that we have created is from brain storming and I think that the reason why we came up with the laws is because we looked at the opportunity to create laws like a dictator (we decided that the government takes total control of everything). As with any country that has such an aggressive attitude toward a citizen's rights, we are not afraid to go to war. However, we are also not going to declare war without any purpose or anything to gain.

The Constitution, of Supreme Living, of Our Great Nation State, Serving Our Great Emperor As One Unified Empire

Preface

We, the people of The Empire.  Acting through our Elected Representatives in our Nation Council shall secure for ourselves, Integrity, Influence, and Individuality through prosperity and cooperation with other nations.  Unless provoked by tyranny from abroad.

Functions Of Government

Executive Branch:

 Article 1. Our Great Emperor, is the symbol of our nation and sanctifies the unity of our great nation.

 Article 2. The Prime Minister will be appointed by the Emperor and chosen from the council maintains governing powers for a period of 4 years.  The Prime Minister holds the highest position in our "Armed Services," but cannot declare war.

Legislative Branch:

"The Council" shall consist of two branches, The Royal Council and House of Councilors.  Both "Houses" have war declaration powers and power to create laws. 

  Article 1.  The Royal Council shall consist of 50 councilors elected from The House of Councilors.  With a "Majority" this house has the ability to "Veto" laws passed by The House of Councilors, Including the declaring of war.  Members of this house may serve The Empire for a lifetime.

 Article 2.  The House of Councilors shall consist of 250 members "Elected" by the people.  This house reserves the right to create laws and declare war when needed.  Members serve for 3 year terms.

Judicial Branch:

The Judicial Branch of Our Great Empire consists of 2 courts, The Royal Court and The Peoples Court.

 Article 1.  The Royal Court Justices shall consist of 7 Judges, appointed by the Prime Minister.  These appointments are held until a Justice retires or expires.

 Article 2.  The people court consists of Justices elected by the people.  These Justices shall serve for a period of 7 years.

Pencils Kill People

 

NO  INTERFERENCE!!

The one thing our government has no idea how to actually do, is not interfere. Instead they are constantly writing policies and making laws for us, the US citizens, that fit their agenda in some way. How the heck does a piece of paper stating a law protect me  from someone threatening my life or better yet how does it stop someone who’s breaking the law. It helps to prosecute them after they have been caught and defines what it is you have to do in order to be convicted BUT it doesn’t stop them in the act. If someone is threatening my life am I supposed to hold up a piece of paper with policies to defend myself? Or should I tell them, “hold on so I can call the police to come protect me.” and snap my fingers to freeze them until the police arrive?

How stupid is our government to think that taking away guns from responsible gun owners is going to stop people from being shot? And why does it seem like criminals have more rights then everyone else. If someone is breaking into my home I feel at that point they are threatening my life, whether they have a weapon or not. I feel that someone coming up and telling me to give them all my money, car or whatever is threating my life regardless of their weapon of choice. I can go on and on.

After doing some research about gun control and gun laws and policies I have decided that our government is crazy!! A  NO INTERFERENCE POLICY is one I definitely support!

WHAT IS A NOINTERFERENCE POLICY?

A policy of no interference is one in which a government decides to let its people protect themselves from criminals, and trusts them with firearms. Thus, there are few or no restrictions on who can own, or who can carry a firearm. Switzerland, as a country, is very close to this idea, and provides a great case study for what happens when a country's citizens are heavily armed. Switzerland has some of the lowest crime rates in the world, despite very high levels of gun ownership. Also, despite being sandwiched between two aggressive powers during World War II, the country remained untouched, largely due to the heavy rates of private gun ownership. Hitler and Mussolini knew that the heavily armed Swiss population would defend itself fiercely, something it did not need to fear from many of its other, more unfortunate neighbors.

Here in California we have so many restrictions and they keep coming.  Contrary to what we have talked about in class with regards to California citizens being able to carry a firearm as long as it isn’t concealed or loaded is not true. JerryBrown fixed that just recently and it’s disgusting!

Self Defense laws

 http://www.shouselaw.com/self-defense.html

 So the question here is "When is it legally excusable for someone to use deadly force against another?". When I hear this questions I immediately think of self defense laws that have been practiced in thousands of court cases all over the country. This seems to be the only fair reason for someone to use lethal force. I would consider that it is best that when people are defending themselves that they use a non-lethal weapon but not every situation has a non-lethal weapon available. For example, some people carry pepper spray and security guards can carry a taser. If they were attacked and used these weapons there would be no question that they were not trying to kill the person. If you happen to be a person that does not feel threatened you may not carry any kind of weapon and in the event that you are attacked you grab the closest weapon in sight to defend yourself like a knife, or baseball bat. When you defended yourself you may accidentally kill the person. I believe this is fair under the circumstances that you intended to defend yourself and did not mean to kill the person.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57406291/video-shows-zimmerman-with-cops-dad-speaks-out/
Under the circumstances that Trayvon Martin was shot by George Zimmerman, I don't believe this was an act of self defense.

Martin, 17 year old walking home from convenient store

A point made in this case is that Zimmerman claimed that Martin had attacked him and he shot him because of this. However, when he was brought into the police station there were no documented injuries or marks on his body. Bruises and scars are major factors with cases of brutality and murder, Zimmerman showed no such signs.

Also, now that I have read more into this case, I can see that George Zimmerman was the neighborhood watchman, but he has a record for violence. In July, 15th 2005 He was charged with battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer with violence during a friend's underage drinking arrest. Obviously, he is not the angel that some are trying to state that he is.

Zimmerman arrested in 2005 for battery on a peace officer.

This may not be just an issue of race but an issue of a 28 year old man that had nothing better to do than stalk a 17 year old because it made him feel empowered. Zimmerman was a person who was obsessed with taking charge and applying his own idea of order to every little thing he could. Dispatcher reports show that he reported trash in front of kohl's, teenagers playing basketball and climbing a fence, kids playing in the street, a car that he thought was suspect because it was driving slow, black men "prowling" the streets, potholes that might damage cars and even more insignificant reports. This guy had way too much time on his hands. His conversation with the 911 dispatcher shows that he was asked if he was following martin and he stated "yes" yet Zimmerman still pursued martin even after Martin ran away. Zimmerman was the aggressor.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/20/george-zimmerman-s-911-call-before-trayvon-martin-s-death-audio.html



Apparently Martin was on the phone with his girlfriend who told him to run away from Zimmerman because Martin knew he was being followed. Zimmerman decided to take the law into his own hands and shoot Martin without any sign of force. Zimmerman should not be carrying a weapon just because he is a neighborhood watchman. Yes he had a license to carry it but he used it in an act of murder not self defense. He is a vigilante and should suffer the consequences for using excessive and lethal force on an innocent minor. I believe that lethal force should only be used in the act of self defense and lethal only by accident (not intentionally killing the person when defending yourself). It is a shame when aggressors like Zimmerman try to use this defense to hide their actions because they want some kind of empowerment or recognition because they feel they deserve it. I believe Self defense is the only reason to use lethal force but in cases like this it is not applicable.

FIRE ARMS POLICY

I feel that a good firearms law should grant the freedoms afforded to our citizens in The Constitutions but at the same time treat those who use their firearms against another with the greatest level.  I struggle with the Idea of people walking around "strapt," but I am a firm believer that our first ten amendments are sacred and the second affords  people the right to bear arms.  Also because there are subcultures in America where guns are woven into their Identity and a father teaching a son how to shoot and hunt is a coming of age "ceremony" for allot of adolescent males.  I do not believe that anyone has the right to take that identity away from them.  I absolutely believe that every person with a gun should always have the duty to retreat in any circumstance before they use their weapon.  And any kind of incident when another human being kills another should always be investigated with suspicion.  There would be no "make my day" laws and if you murder an unarmed innocent person(whether he looks suspicious to you or not)  you will pay the price.  Gun owners would have a "DUTY" to protect life.  That would mean that if an accident happens they are still liable for the death that was caused by their doing and their firearm.

Our Empire

I must say that I am thoroughly impressed with our group coming together the way that we have, however I know we still need improving. I think this class differs from most that I have taken in the sense that it's a group effort.. With that said I feel like we are coming together more and more each week, and improving our interaction skills with each other. I know myself personally I would like to understand the nation state game better and be more involved, and I know others probably feel the same. I'm excited to see our group continue to work together and I think everyone has a unique quality they bring to the table.

A group is its own worst enemy

A group is its own worst enemy

http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html

 I don’t believe anyone did more than their fair when it comes to our group. I do believe that group members input whatever they feel comfortable with putting in. Some members can be outspoken while others will simply agree for the sake of the group. My performance would be an 8 because I have made an effort to communicate with the group and also make sure that we are all comfortable with our progress. The most important part about the article I listed on the link above is that a group can be its own worst enemy if the group does not communicate and/or agree.

 I would not remove anyone from our group. If I were to add another member to our group this person would be in class everyday and would have strong research and communication skills. I think that spending time on research and communicating more is something that our group can work on.

A.  Our group has not been doing so well on showing up. I give it a 7. However we have done well regardless if some of us show up or not.

B.  I have definitely done my fair share by inputting my ideas, providing material and  respecting everyone’s ideas. I give our group a 9.

C.  Being on time is something that most of us have not had a problem with. Either we are here on time or we don’t show up. I give us a 10.

D.  I believe that we all respond on time to one another but I think that communicating outside of the classroom is something that we are lacking. Especially after we had our mid-term I realize that it would have been good if we contacted each other a little bit more before our presentation. I give our group an 8.

E.  We have not had any conflicts within our group. I give our group a 10.

F.  Most of us are attentive and do not allow any phone usage except for research. I give our group a 9.

My 5 rules for having an effective group.

1-Punctuality

2-respect everyone’s opinions

3-Don’t be shy to express your opinion

4-Everyone should be working on something

5-Communicate with each other as much as possible

I replied to the art blog about graffiti and for some reason was not able to share my picture so I decided to do it here if nowhere else. Hope you all don't mind....

I really think that overall our group came together and did a great job on our presentation. I would rate myself an 6 or 7 on our presentation. I feel that I did enough research to not only be able to present my part but I was also able to answer questions from the audience. I like our group dynamics and don’t think I would change much. I do worry sometimes about how our group is affected by one members absence but when they are in class they add to our group and came through on the presentation. Showing up and on time would be rated 10. Doing fair share of work and responding to emails would be rated 9 and conflict and being present in the group would be rated 8.

Here’s a link to a site that I think really does a good job at coming up with rules for an effective group. http://cte.uwaterloo.ca/teaching_resources/tips/teamwork_skills.html Communication is one of the most important rules of working in a group, Individual responsibility and accountability as well as Management and organization.

Midterm Reflection

When given this midterm assignment I almost freaked out because I feared that only half of our group would do their part and the other half would fall short.  I thought for sure that I would have to compensate for someone who didn't do their work.  So I studied every aspect of the death penalty and did 3 blogs to make sure I had enough info on it.  This is  a reflection of my obsessiveness  and my lack of faith in others.  When we got up to do our presentation everyone did great and taught me a lesson in life to have a little faith in my fellow students.
Since I did put so much into making sure everything was covered I of course put my contribution at a 10 but I didn't need to because of my fellow country men and women-ALL HAIL OUR SUPREME EMPEROR.
I don't think I would like to remove anyone I would like a couple of them to pick up the slack and get more involved but I believe that if these persons tried harder and showed some initiative  they could be a valuable asset to this great nation of ours.
A. I believe our group needs to improve when it comes to showing up and doing the work I believe we rate at a 5.
B.I believe that some members need to start doing their fair share we rate at a 6.
C.  When we are their we are on time 9.
D.  I believe we communicate pretty good 8.
E We haven't really had much conflict. 8.
F.  I believe that our group needs to work on not being distracted and paying attention fully to our nation state game. 3.


I feel that in need to be less overbearing to foster unity in our group.

Five rules for having an effective group:

1.  Communication! Communication! Communication!
2.  Be focused on the project at hand.
3.  Compromise is vital.
4.  Respect everyone's point of view
5.  "Fortune Favours The Bold"  Think outside the box

http://www.netplaces.com/managing-people/work-group-dynamics/effective-teamwork.htm

Should it stay or should it go??

"Should it stay or shold it go now? If it goes there will be trouble, and if it stays it will be double! So come and let me know!?" That is a question that the November Ballots in California will have on them addressing the state’s death penalty. The SAFE California Act qualified for the ballot after receiving 800,000 petition signatures, well over the required amount. The SAFE California initiative will be the first ever statewide vote to replace the death penalty with life in prison with no chance of parole. The SAFE California Act will save the state hundreds of millions of dollars. The initiative sets aside $100 million of the budget savings– $30 million a year, for three years – to solve open rape and murder cases.  

California is wasting so much money when it could be put to so many other uses. I am and have always been for the death penalty but agree with the SAFE California Act. The US Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty is constitutional but there hasn’t been an execution in California for six years. With 725 condemned inmates living on San Quentin’s Death Row but no executions since 2006 how can anyone possibly think our states death penalty is “working”.  Jerry Brown says its working and he insists there are no innocent inmates on California’s Death Row but yet also seems to think that to make the death penalty work the state needs to spend more money on the defense lawyers.  It seems like the governments answer to what’s needed to fix a problem or make something work better, of ANY sort, is always “we need more money”. That’s the wrong answer and a line of BS that’s become the standard script for government to say and use as an excuse to not fixing anything. People don’t want to pay more taxes and California is already constantly cutting funding for this or that so when things don’t get fixed that’s the BS excuse we are given. “We need more money and just don’t have it” California would have more money if would do the opposite of that. By getting rid of the joke we call the death penalty here in California we would spend less money that could be used towards other things like solving the huge percentage of unsolved rapes and murders due to lack of funding of our police departments.

The life of a condemned person is very different from any other inmate. Death row protects its occupants from the perils of the prison yard and provides creature comforts denied to other inmates. Every effort is made to keep the condemned mentally and physically fit so that they may, with glaring irony, keep their date with the executioner. However, that execution date is uncertain. Death penalty trials in California take an average of 25 years to execution and more inmates die of old age or illness rather than fulfilling the public's mandate for their execution. Since California voted to reinstate the death penalty in 1978, our state has spent $4 billion to execute only 13 people. “These executions did not make us safer, nor has the lack of executions made us less safe,” says Aundre M. Herron who has worked as a lawyer on both sides of the criminal justice system.  WHATEVER! Is the response I have to her and all the others that use this as one of their defenses to abolishing the death penalty. If the states would take a more conservative stance similar to Texas or Virginia and actually execute the inmates that have been given the sentenced of death it would make us safer in two ways. #1 Murders and rapists might fear the justice system and there for not commit the crime. I know people are going to argue the other side to that comment and say that’s not true but I believe it’s true! Just like children who see someone/another kid getting a big trouble for something they did wrong; and they don’t want that (the punishment) to happen to them so they are more likely not to do whatever it was that got the other into trouble. #2 is that if instead of spending billions of dollars on the condemned for 25+ years; maybe if we followed Texas’s example of how their death penalty is run all that extra money could be used to fund programs that prevent crime (ex: youth clubs, after school programs), and protect us (ex: law enforcement, CPS) WE’D BE SAFER cause our communities would be safer.

One of the arguments against the death penalty is that once it has been administered the results are final and the case is over. What if an innocent person was put to death? How can we be sure they aren’t innocent? Does the state want the burden of finding out that the execution they’d carried out was of an innocent person? BLAH!? BLAH!? BLAH!? There is always talk around the fact that DNA testing has exonerated people convicted of crimes they didn’t commit and some of those have been on death row. More than 200 men and women have been wrongfully convicted of serious crimes in California, six of whom were sentenced to death. Here are some of their stories. People who are doing and being convicted of crimes today are being convicted with DNA proving their guilt so it seems to me we should be less worried about convicting innocent people now days and therefore should be less worried about killing an innocent person wrongfully convicted!!!

Then of course you can’t forget about our 8^th Amendment Right protecting us against CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishments inflicted on us. I’m totally for protecting our constitutional rights and making sure they are upheld and that government doesn’t abuse their position. BUT oh my God! How many court cases and Supreme Court Judges’ interpretations of cruel and unusual punishment is needed?

The United States Supreme Court decision in Furman v. Georgia, which declared Georgia’s procedure to be unconstitutional on the grounds that it was cruel and unusual punishment, essentially negated all death penalty sentences nationwide. Then it was re-instituted in the United States in the 1976 Gregg v. Georgia decision. Since this Texas has executed over four times more inmates than Virginia (the state with the second-highest number of executions in the post-Gregg era) and nearly 37 times more inmates than California (the state with the largest death row population)! On December 15, 2006, in the case Morales v. Tilton, Judge Fogel ruled that California execution procedures violate the 8^th Amendment because inexperienced, untrained prison staff do executions in crowded, poorly-lit settings; Fogel wrote that "implementation of lethal injection" by California "is broken, but...can be fixed. To him I ask, how can they (the prison staff) ever get the “experience” supposedly needed to execute a person and are you kidding me!!?? What kind of ambiance is needed for this special event???? Well there’s 700+ inmates on California’s death row so I’m thinking the inexperienced prison staff can get the experience they need by the time they carry out an 8^th of the sentences those 700+ have been given!!!! And just so it’s not unconstitutional based on lighting why not give the condemned prisoner the choice of how they’d like the room lit?? Last meal, last words, last choice of mood lighting?!

PEOPLE! Hello?! Capital punishment cannot be unconstitutional because the Constitution expressly mentions it and two centuries of Court decisions assumed that it was constitutional. There is so much information about all the cases regarding the 8^th Amendment and everyone has their own way to twist it to fit their argument on the death penalty including the Judges who take it away, give it back, put it on time out, make up new rules. It’s really hard to sort through it all so then why is it that those opposing the death penalty think they are right in saying it’s unconstitutional and those of us for the death penalty are always to have to prove that it is and jump through hoops to make sure killers are treated with a gentle hand at all times. Were their victims treated with such human regard? HELL NO! Give me a break! I could care less if they are in a little discomfort as they are injected with a cocktail that’s purpose is to make them comfortable in the few minutes before they are injected with that last lethal injection of the cocktail which the whole purpose of it is....TO KILL THEM! A heart attack is painful, an accidental drowning or burning to death is pure agony, cancer is painful and can make for a long and painful death, and the list of how people in the free world die every day. Get over it!

But in the world we live in, people can’t get over it, especially in California!! So as much as I am for the death penalty and think it’s so lame that we are a bunch of pantie wastes that care so much about criminal’s well being and comfort; I am 100% for the SAFE California Act and will be voting for its approval in November. If doing away with California’s death penalty, that I’d like to add is pretty much useless, will free up millions of dollars that are far more needed elsewhere (instead of wasting money on something that seems to me is unfixable, especially in such a liberal state) in our state then so be it. I can always move to a state that takes keeping convicted killers serious and carries out the sentences handed to them!!!!

The ultimate price

            Death is the ultimate price u can pay, sometimes when a crime is carried out that is so horrendous capital punishment is the only option. The first death penalty laws date as far back as the eighteenth century from the code of King Hammurabi of Babylon. In these times they would carry out the punishment by crucifixion, drowning, beaten to death, being burnt alive and impalement. In tenth century Britain William the Conqueror used hanging for any crime, unless they were at war. Capital punishment was brought over to America from England. The first case was carried out in the James Town colony of Virginia in 1608. Captain George Kendall was believed to be a spy for the Spanish which resulted in him being first recipient of the death penalty in America. Today the death penalty is only carried out in 35 of the 50 states. The process is also much longer, a man once stayed on death row for 33 years before his execution was carried out. Now in my own opinion  its a shame to have to take a persons life, but in some circumstances I believe it is necessary.



http://youtu.be/TVMho2cP1NE
http://youtu.be/v3Afr-zI8Ys

FOR OR AGAINST?

Since being given this midterm assignment I have been researching Capital Punishment all week.  Most people have a passionate belief whether they are for or against it.  I am going to try to be as objective as I possible can in this blog. First from what I have gathered people  who are for capital punishment for the most part believe:

• A person who has committed a crime like killing or raping another person should be given death penalty, which is as severe punishment as the act. It is said that when a criminal is given a capital punishment, it dissuades others in the society from committing such serious crimes. They would refrain from such crimes due to fear of losing their lives. This would definitely help in reducing crime rate in society.
• If a criminal is jailed, he may again commit the same crime after being released from prison. Giving him capital punishment would make sure that the society is safe from being attacked by criminals. It seems to be an appropriate punishment for serial killers and for those who continue to commit crimes even after serving imprisonment.
• Some believe that instead of announcing life imprisonment for the convicts, where they would have to live a futile life behind closed bars, it is better to kill them. It is said that imprisoning someone is more expensive than executing him. Rather than spending on a person who may again commit terrifying crime, it is better to put him to death.
• Capital punishment is equated as revenge for pain and suffering that the criminal inflicted on the victim. Some people strongly believe that a person who has taken the life of another person does not have a right to live. Sentencing such a criminal can give relief to the family members of the victim that their loved one has obtained justice.
• It is also important for the safety of fellow prison inmates and guards, as people who commit horrifying crimes like murder are believed to have a violent personality and may, in future, attack someone during imprisonment. These reasons emphasize the importance of capital punishment for the betterment of human society. However, there is another section of people who believe that it is an immoral and unethical act of violence.

THOSE WHO ARE AGAINST IT BELIEVE THAT:

• If we execute a person, what is the difference between us and the criminal who has committed the horrifying crime of killing another individual.
• Capital punishment is not always just and appropriate. Usually, it has been seen that poor people have to succumb to death penalty as they cannot afford good lawyers to defend their stance. There are very rare cases of rich people being pronounced capital punishment. Also, an individual from minority communities are more likely to be given death penalty.
• Every human being is entitled to receive a second chance in life. Putting a convict behind bars is always a logical option than killing him, as there is a chance that he may improve. People who have served life sentences are reported to have bettered their earlier ways of living and have made worthwhile contribution to the society.
• There is also a chance that an individual is innocent and is wrongly charged for a crime he has never committed. There have been cases where individuals were released after being given death sentence, because they were proved innocent. There are also cases where a person's innocence was proved after he was put to death. Hence, it is best to avoid executing a person.
• It is reported that there is no relation between capital punishment and crime rate i.e giving death penalty does not decrease crime rate in the society. Crimes are prevalent in countries where capital punishment exists and also where it has been abolished.
• The estimated cost of keeping all prisoners currently on death row in California is about 143 million dollars a year.  To keep those same prisoners in prison for life without possibility of parole would be about 11.5 million a year, saving the state roughly 131.5 million dollars annually.

The question whether capital punishment is a moral or an immoral act in a cultured society, does not have a definite answer. Whether to give capital punishment to a criminal or not, may depend on his previous criminal records and the seriousness of the crime he has committed. But, do we really have the right to take the life of our fellow human beings? 

Capital Punishment...an eye for an eye

I am a firm believer that the punishment should fit the crime, however in this day and age it seems that convicted felons and those serving time for capital crimes are receiving more rights that half of us living in the free world. As an inmate serving life in prison these days means three square meals a day, and access to the Internet, a job that pays, and watching their favorite television shows.

So I ask the question... Why is capital punishment wrong? Because it violates our constitutional rights? If you have taken another persons life, why should you be able to continue living out yours.... especially with all the amenities, with the exception of walking the streets? If you have taken the life of another person and are found guilty by a jury of your peers, then you should be condemned. As far as I am concerned there is no rehabilitation for these convicted of capital offenses. Why should we continue to provide for these people for the rest of their natural life?

Currently there are 34 states that employ the death penalty. One of the largest issues aside from Constitution rights is the cost of putting someone to death. With the lengthy appeal processes and what it costs to try a death penalty case many critics believe it is less expensive to house the convict for the duration. The average cost to convict in a death penalty case ranges from one to three million dollars currently, and the life sentence carries a significantly lower price tag.

The facts are the facts and everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter.... however if your loved ones life was taken.... how would you think justice would be appropriately served? click here to view fact sheets on the death penalty

Is the Death Penalty Necessary?!!

There are many reasons why people feel that the death penalty is necessary but I most certainly disagree. Sure we understand that if someone is aware that a crime is punishable by death that they may not commit a crime but there will be situations in which a person is not guilty and could suffer from the consequences that our court system failed to address. In fact, one aspect of this topic is that punishing someone to death for something such as murder itself is a huge contradiction. For example, someone could have destroyed my career, robbed me for everything I have and because they did this, I kill this person. Then, the society I live in will execute me for doing exactly what I have done, punishing someone by death.

So I think it would be fair to say that if the community does not want to allow people punishing each other by death then perhaps it would be a good idea to lead by example and not execute someone because of something they have done. How is it acceptable for a group of people to have someone killed? If this happens in a court room it is called “Capital Punishment”, If it happens outside of a court room it is called “conspiracy for murder”. In fact, if you google what you call a group of people that try to kill someone the top articles that show up are “street gangs” and “The death penalty”. Obviously these two groups must have something in common.

Given that we are all human and we all share the same vulnerabilities and strengths, what gives any of us the entitlement to tell someone whether or not they deserve to die? Nobody should be given that right and I don’t believe anyone should think that they are qualified to make such a decision. Let’s face it, Law is just like any other area of study, in that I mean that it is constantly changing and there are always things that need to be addressed or altered. This is why the American Constitution has amendments, because those who created it knew that nothing will ever be perfect unless it can be changed. 

So with that being said, it is not possible to believe that every single individual that is tried in a criminal case received a fair trial. Since it is true that there is no such thing as a perfect court system we can’t start killing people because we believe beyond any doubt that this person deserves to die.  Some cases can be found to be unfair if you took the time to research them.  There have been many defendants that were physically attacked and they defended themselves. When they defended themselves they used a lethal weapon (usually a firearm) and killed the attacker. When these situations were speculated some of these people were convicted of murder because it was not considered  an act of self defense because of the use of a lethal weapon which can be consider as excessive force. So with these matters in mind it is possible for anyone to be convicted of a serious crime even if they had reasonable intentions and were given a trial.

Mahatma Ghandi

If someone is killed over a civil matter it is murder, If it is in a war it is called a casualty, if it is in court it is capital punishment. The only difference to me is what word you prefer to call it.

“An eye for an eye” is a very popular excerpt that many people believe in when speaking of justice, However, I would agree with a qoute from Mahatma Ghandi which is

  

“An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind”