Parents to change Underage Drinking Habits

April 22nd, 2008

Josh Schultze 

Proper Parenting needed to lower Underage Drinking  

            In today’s society many people choose to start drinking before the legal age limit.  There are countless problems in our society today that occur as a result of underage drinking and crimes there about.  Many studies have been done on the effects that drinking has on today’s society.  Results show that having a higher age for people to be able to drink doesn’t help drinking related problems.  Teenagers still continue to drink at a young age.  However many parents in today’s society help to promote the problem as a result of minimal supervision and high levels of freedom.            There are more and more parents in today’s society that have become extremely lax with what all they allow their young teenage children to do.  They give them more and more opportunities to do things at a young age and one of the biggest things is drinking.  Parents tell their kids they are allowed to drink but only when at home and things of that nature which makes kids think its ok to drink.  They then don’t see drinking as a very big deal and they become more and more lax about doing it.  After a while they begin going to parties to drink and then they begin drinking and driving.  Many kids in today’s society think that it’s not a big deal to drink and drive so long as they control just how much they drink and are careful to not go too far.  As you can see drinking has become a pretty big deal in today’s society and it’s one that is affecting everyone in the country. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Instructor, Josh Schultz | 1 Comment »

The Flawless Death Penalty

April 21st, 2008

By Kyle

The death penalty has always been a heavily heated subject. It has been used in voting for presidents and other important political offices. I find that it is unstable and dysfunctional. I believe that capital punishment needs to be improved because of the flaws and untrained employees it possesses in order for it to become a sufficient punishment for murderers. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Authors, Kyle Wimp | 1 Comment »

Death Penalty Okay When Used on Serial Killers

April 17th, 2008

By Rain

The death penalty has been used as a form of punishment since the beginning of mankind.  Throughout history men, women, and children have all been executed for numerous reasons. Jesus Christ himself received the death penalty as his punishment.  Whether to use the death penalty is a huge controversy in the United States, but with 36 states still in favor of this form of punishment, a majority of American’s must see capital punishment as effective and worthwhile.  The other 14 states do not support the death penalty because of cost and violation of our human rights. With the Presidential elections coming up, the capital punishment topic is a major factor in who Americans will vote for.  I have always supported the death penalty, but after much research I was forced to look at all the points of view for people who are for and against the death penalty.  With many consequences to the death penalty, I now believe that this form of punishment should be used, but only on serial killers.                                            

One consequence to the death penalty is that it creates an endless cycle of violence and emotion. People who support the death penalty may do so because they feel that it provides justice for the victim’s family.  Vicki Schieber, a mother or a murder victim, remains anti-death penalty. Vicki is on the board of directors of Murder Victim’s Families for Human Rights. Schieber states that the death penalty typically focuses on the person convicted of murder rather than the victims of murder and their surviving families.  “The effects on the family and even on the wider community extend well beyond the initial shock and trauma. The common assumption in this country is that families who suffered this kind of loss will support the death penalty” (The Philadelphia Inquirer).   According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, an increasing number of victim’s families are protesting capital punishment.  Vicki Schieber and other members of MVFHR believe that the death penalty is not what will help them heal. People assume that the way to seek justice is through revenge.  Members of MVFHR do not agree. They feel that responding to one killing with another killing just causes more pain and does not lessen their own pain (The Philadelphia Inquirer). It causes an endless cycle of violence (Dow). They know what it is like to have a son, daughter, mother or father taken away from them, and they do not want to put another family through the same grief.

I know how the members of MVFHR feel about causing pain to another family, and that is another reason why I feel that the death penalty should not be used in all cases. It should not be used when someone murders once, because that person can learn a lesson by serving a long prison term. Life without parole will also allow the victim’s grieving family to start the healing process. Capital punishment is a long process, and it doesn’t allow the grieving family to heal because they have a daily reminder of their loss. In the case of a serial killer though, I believe that families will be more supportive of the death penalty.  While it may cause the murderer’s family some pain, there is no way that the convicted will ever have a chance to take away the life of one or more innocent victims again.  Sometimes one must take the life of another to save the lives of many.

Another consequence to using the death penalty as a form of punishment is the outrageous cost. Thus, it is not feasible to use this form of punishment in all cases.  When someone is sentenced to death, it is not a simple process. The convicted is not taken right away to the electric chair or put to death by lethal injection.  Instead, he or she is given a lawyer, and will spend several years in and out of court.  As everyone knows, court costs are very expensive, but homicide trials are a drawn out process and thus, more expensive.  Those who are in favor of banning the death penalty focus a lot of their argument on financial cost.  These people have conducted several tests, and in each experiment found that the cost to carry out one death sentence costs two to five times more than keeping that same criminal in prison for the rest of his/her life (Haag).  This cost is paid for by the American citizens, the taxpayers, and results in tax increase.  Each convicted individual will file for appeals, and the process may take up to 15 or 20 years.  The slow process of capital punishment has resulted in a lagging death row.           

Texas has one of the largest death rows with 442 inmates.  Over half of the people on death row in Texas have been on the list for more than 6 years.  Sixty people on death row nation-wide have been so for over 18 years (Sharp). This process is so long that a large portion of the condemned killers will eventually die from natural causes rather than the executioner (Tisch).  Each person on death row costs the American people approximately $2 million dollars (Death Penalty Information Center). If every single person that committed murder were sent to death, that would cost the government and the taxpayers a significant amount of money. Statistics show that even if the less harmless people convicted of murder were sentenced life without parole it would save us a substantial amount of money.  “In Texas, a death penalty case usually costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years” (Death Penalty Information Center).  The outrageous cost of the death penalty is one of the largest consequences of using this form of punishment and why I believe it should only be used on the worst cases.  

It is because people who commit murder one time are sent to death that our death rows are lagging.  I’m not saying that people who only commit murder once should be let off easy, what I am saying is that these are the people who should be sentenced to life without parole. The people that commit a heinous crime like murder repetitively are the ones that American’s should be willing to spend money on.   People who enjoy hurting other people have psychological problems that more than likely will never go away. The only way to stop them from hurting again is to send them to death. When looked at in this perspective, the death penalty is deterrence to crime.

According to the yearly Gallop Poll, 67% of American’s are in favor of the death penalty when used on a person convicted of murder (Carroll).  One of the main reasons most people support the death penalty is because they see it as deterrence to crime.  When executing a murderer, he or she will never have the chance to harm or murder again thus giving our country a safer environment. Dudley Sharp II, resource director for the criminal reform organization Justice for All, proclaims that approximately 81 percent of Americans feel that the death penalty results in appropriate punishment.  In Travis Durfee’s article “To Kill or Not to Kill”, Sharp declares that “Living murderers murder again and executed murderers do not. It is as blatantly common sense as it sounds” (Durfee).  In Sharp’s own essay he states that “Executions save lives…Our choice is to spare the lives of the murderers and to, thereby, sacrifice the lives of the innocent or to execute those murderers and to, thereby, spare the lives of the innocent” (Sharp).  If we send a serial murderer to death, we are keeping that person from ever taking an innocent life again.   

Studies show that in general, capital punishment doesn’t serve as deterrence to crime. “It is irrational to assume that a criminal is going to carefully weigh the consequences of his actions before committing a criminal act.  Clearly, by the time he has decided to commit his crime, he has already disregarded other forms of punishment besides the death penalty, such as lengthy imprisonment. He is also likely to assume that he will not be caught anyway” (SoYouWanna.com). I do not feel that the death penalty serves as a threat to criminals and in turn does not result in deterrence to crime. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 84% of the country’s top criminologists feel that the death penalty is not deterrence to crime. A research poll of police chiefs in the United States found that the majority of the police chiefs feel that there are better ways to deter crime than to use capital punishment as a law enforcement tool (Death Penalty Information Center). I believe that the death penalty is not a good deterrence when used as a threat. I do, however, feel that capital punishment deters crime when used on serial killers. It is a preventative way to keep another life from being taken.

People argue with me saying that capital punishment is not needed, that life without parole is a deterrent and is a good enough punishment.  I agree that life without parole is a good enough punishment for capital offenses, but not for serial killers. Opponents to the death penalty do not take into account that prisons are violent places and that homicides can potentially happen there too, especially when serial killers are involved. Prisons portray very dangerous places, mostly because of the heartless people who get life without parole instead of the death penalty. The violence within a prison often does not match the violence we in society have grown accustom to.  One of the major reasons that the death penalty is still instated is because it is used as a tool to prevent crime from happening again.  Although some prisoners do get life without parole, they still have the opportunity of killing other prisoners.  The death penalty should be used in extreme cases where the convicted has taken the life of another on more than one occasion. People who have no heart will not stop killing until his/her own life is taken.

A study was conducted to view the records of 136 convicted murderers.  These Studies showed that potentially violent misconduct was found in 36.8% of the records, assaultive violations were found in 14%, serious assaults accounted for 5.1%, and zero homicides were found (Cunningham & Sorenson).  While no homicides happened, the high percentage of violent misconduct and assaults show that if the prisoners were not stopped that ultimately the incidents would have ended in homicide.  Serial killers enjoy killing people no matter where they are.  If the murderers are on the streets they will kill innocent people, if they are in prison they will try to kill not-so-innocent people, and if they are sentenced to death they will not be able to even attempt hurting someone else.

While I do not feel that the death penalty is the best way to deter crime in all cases, I do find it necessary to be used on people who commit heinous crimes over and over again.  One of the major reasons that the death penalty is still used in the United States and across the world is because it is used as a tool to prevent crime from happening again. I believe that the death penalty may be the best form of punishment for someone who has killed numerous times because it prevents them from killing again. Although some convicted murderers and rapists do get life without parole, they still have the opportunity of killing other prisoners. The reason I feel so strongly about sentencing serial killers to death is because they have a repetitive behavior that will not change. People who enjoy watching others hurt have serious psychological problems.   The only way to stop someone with this violent, repetitive behavior is to end his or her own life.

Overall, the death penalty is not the best form of punishment.  It is a costly, emotionally drawn out process, and is not deterrence to crime when used as a threat.  The death penalty should, however, be used in cases where the convicted has repetitive, violent behavior which has resulted in more than one death.  Being murdered is one of the worst things that someone else could do to you.  People who partake in these actions more than once are known as serial killers.  These are the most dangerous people in the world. They have no heart and they have no sympathy. They hurt because it makes them happy to see others suffer.  People like that do not deserve the right to live, and the only way to prevent them from hurting again is to take his or her life.  When asked to kill or not to kill in a situation like this, I’m all for capital punishment.

Works CitedCarroll, Joseph. “Who Supports the Death Penalty.” The Gallup Organization. 16 Nov 2004. Death Penalty Information Center. 17 Apr 2008 <http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=23&did=1266>.Dow, David. “Lethal Injustice”. Chronicle of Higher Education (2005): Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Indiana University. S.E. Lib., New Albany. 14 March 2008. http://www.epnet.com.Dufree, Travis. “To Kill or Not to Kill.” Metroland. (2002). 17 March 2008 <http://www.metroland.net/back_issues/vol_25_no30/index.html>. “Facts about the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Information Center. 02 Jan. 2008. 26 Feb. 2008 <http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org>.Haag, Ernest.  “The Death Penalty is Just”. (2007). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Indiana University. S.E. New Albany. 14 March 2008. <http://www.galegroup.com.>Mark Douglas Cunningham, Jon R Sorensen. “Capital Offenders in Texas Prisons: Rates, Correlates, and an Actuarial Analysis of Violent Misconduct. ” Law and Human Behavior  31.6 (2007): 553-71. ABI/INFORM Global. ProQuest.  Kentucky Wesleyan college, Owensboro, KY.  17 Apr. 2008 <http://www.proquest.com/>Sharp, Dudley. “DEATH PENALTY AND SENTENCING INFORMATION.” Alta Vista 10/1/97 17 Apr 2008. <http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html>.”So You Want to Learn About the Death Penalty.” SoYouWanna.com. 2007. Demand Entertainment. 17 Apr 2008 <http://www.soyouwanna.com/site/pros_cons/deathpenalty/deathpenalty3.html>.Tisch, Chris. “Justice Lags on Crowded Row.” St. Petersburg Times 05 Mar. 2007. LexisNexis Academic. Kentucky Wesleyan College, Owensboro. 26 Feb. 2008.“Verbatim Verbatim’…Killing This Man Would Not Bring Our Daughter Back.’” The Philadelphia Inquirer 02 Apr. 2006. LexisNexis Academic. Kentucky Wesleyan College, Owensboro. 26 Feb. 2008.

Posted in Rain Sumner | 1 Comment »

Universal Drunk

April 17th, 2008

In 2006, an estimated 17,602 people died in alcohol-related traffic crashes—an average of one every 30 minutes. These deaths constitute 41 percent of the 42,642 total traffic fatalities. Of these, an estimated 13,470 involved a driver with an illegal BAC (.08 or greater). On average someone is killed by a drunk driver every 39 minutes.( National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Instructor | No Comments »

Historical Defense of the Death Penalty

April 15th, 2008

The death penalty, the mention of these three words strikes fears in the hearts of all criminals who lived there lives in such a way as to warrant such a fate.  The death penalty is as old as history dating back to the time of the Babylonians in the time of King Hammurabi’s law code which specified twenty-five crimes worthy of the death penalty.  We can trace the death penalty’s bloody path to the Romans who crucified, burnt, beat, drowned and impaled the criminals both worthy and unworthy of such a fate.  In the United States some have called for its abolishment stating that it is cruel and unusual.  However the death penalty has been used throughout the United States history so how can it be considered unusual.  I intend to prove by using the United States history that the death penalty is neither cruel nor unusual.

            America’s use of the death penalty is largely credited to Great Britain seeing that there cultural influence over us is the greatest.  The first execution in America took place in 1608; Captain George Kendall in the Jamestown Colony of Virginia was executed for being a spy for the Spanish who at this moment in history still harbored a grudge against the English for that whole Spanish armada thing.  Here we see the basis for our military laws against spies. 

            Although the death penalty is considered to be blind to race and ethnicity it is not so much when it comes to gender.  The first woman to be executed in the United States was Jane Champion who was hanged in James City Virginia in 1632.  To the present day women constitute only about three percent of United States executions.  The laws varied from state to state with each having its own rules and regulations, in the state of Virginia someone could be killed for stealing grapes, killing chickens, and denying the one true “God.”

            The movement to abolish the death penalty is not confined to modern times either, it finds its roots in the writings of several great thinkers writers and even religious men such as Montesquieu, Voltaire, Bentham, John Bellars, and John Bellars.  It was Cesare Beccaria’s essay On Crime and Punishment that actually began reforms in Great Britain and a few other countries.  Cesare essay also had a profound impact on American society; Thomas Jefferson introduced a bill in the senate that would amend the harsh laws of Virginia’s death penalty.  The anti-death penalty forces received a significant boost when Benjamin Franklin added his name and prestige to the anti-death penalty cause. 

            As anyone could see the death penalty battle is not original or modern, it is the product of centuries of debate and controversy over mans right to take another’s life in the name of justice.  Many will point out that the death penalty does not reduce the crime rate; in fact some reports suggest that when somebody is executed the rate of murder does go up.  Others claim that the death penalty should not be used at all because we as human beings have no right to take another human beings life.  Still others claim that the method used by most states, lethal injection, is inhumane because it causes the victim pain before he/she dies only they can’t tell anybody there in pain because they are already asleep and drugged to the gills.  Also according to the Federal Department of Crimes and Justices, the crime rate is at an all time high with murders being one of the top five crimes committed.

            The answer to these objections is simple; now I am a Christian and believe in what the Bible teaches about execution and the death penalty.  The Bible states that “if a man and his neighbor quarrel and one strikes the other and kills him then he should be put to death.  If he had no intention of killing him then he could flee to a place of refuge.  If however the man conspired to kill another man then he should be put to death.  All this can be found in the Bible but I have another refutation.  How do doctors know that somebody is in pain when they are executed?  I mean do they wake up and tell them?

Obviously not, there must be a basis by which a doctor can say that someone being executed is in pain without checking them.  To the objection that we could find a more humane way to kill someone I have no real objection.  If someone has a better way of killing someone then by all means share it.  I personally think that lethal injection is a lame way to kill someone.  If doctors don’t want someone to feel any pain when they die then why not resurrect the guillotine.  Quick painless and much more efficient, and there is absolutely no pain whatsoever, why?  Well because when the spinal cord is severed then life ends.  

The death penalty is a deterrent against criminals but it is also something else, it is justice.  In this world man is born basically evil.  Every intention of his thought is on evil continually, we see it in the media and in every day life.  There are some crimes that can never be forgiven; some hurts that run to deep against society to ever really heal.  We can think have a few people who deserve the death penalty even though they are already dead.  Andrea Yates who murdered her children and then made up some crazy story about how Satan told her to do it, David Berkowitz the so called “son of Sam” who terrorized New York in the 1970’s, Dennis Rader the BTK (Bind, Torture, Kill) killer who murdered ten women before being caught.  If anyone can look me in the face and tell me these people do not deserve the death penalty then I would begin to seriously doubt the ability of government to deal with criminals of this caliber. 

The death penalty is awful but then again we live in an awful world were people are the main evil.  This is a sad truth and I do not enjoy writing about it but I feel compelled to let people know that while serial killers and rapists are out there then the shadow of the gallows is necessary. 

   

Posted in Ben Waldron | 1 Comment »

Creationism. To be or not to be that is the question

April 15th, 2008

Creationism…to be or not to be? That is the Question          

   In my high school I was sitting in science class, listing to the teacher rambling on about animals when all of a sudden she says,             “We are going to be talking about evolution.” In my science class we had two really religious people. They said, Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Instructor, Mallory Mount | 1 Comment »

An Intelligent Argument

April 15th, 2008

by Andrea 

In schools, I believe that Intelligent Design would be the best way to teach students about the creation of the Earth and its evolution since.  Both Creationism and Evolution provide some answers to this quandary, but I believe that Intelligent Design provides more answers than questions.  It is my hope that my research will be able to persuade anyone to believe the same about Intelligent Design as I do.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Andrea Stone | 1 Comment »

Drink Responsibly…. Lets add Drink Legally

April 15th, 2008

Drink Responsibly… Let’s add Drink Legally            A young man wakes up on a Saturday morning a little disoriented with a massive headache. He looks to his right, he sees his Felcher High football jersey, a few empty beer cans, a couple of Dixie cups and a lacy blue bra. As his eyes race across the room trying to catch up with the pounding in his chest, he sees a few more clothing items scattered here and there both his and those of someone else. He tries to remember the night before, how he ended up here and whose clothes these were. He vaguely remembers talking to a few chicks at the party following their victory; however, he doesn’t remember bringing anyone up to his room. He gets up and makes his way to the bathroom first grabbing a pair of gym shorts from his drawer. He pauses as he notices a note on his dresser.  I borrowed some shorts and a t-shirt! Last night was crazy… XOXO K. The young man, note still clutched in his hand, sets back down with a disappointed look and without a clue as to whom in the world K is and what exactly made last night so crazy.               A group of girls gather at a local hamburger spot feasting on milkshakes, fries, and of course salads. After a few moments after the food arrives the topic centers around the absence of one of the girls and the crazy night out they had the night before. One of the girls’ phone rings and not a second after answering her entire face changes. Her eyes began to well up with tears as the conversation goes on, the entire table goes silent. The girl hangs up the phone and through Armitage 2gushing tears announces to her friends that the girl who they had just been inquiring about had suffered alcohol poisoning and was in a coma at the local hospital. The girls remain silent none of them knowing what to say, and all of them knowing that they too were soon to be reaping the consequences of their own underage illegal behavior.            Olives flowing out of a car, police lights, cartoon dogs, red ribbons, people standing then falling to demonstrate a statistic all of these things are used as marketing tools to raise awareness for one issue or another. Drinking and driving, drug use, tobacco use you name it. However, while watching television the eye does not perceive an advertisement recognizing the issue of underage or illegal drinking. You do not see any ads depicting similar situations to those given above. Some might argue that this isn’t even an issue, even though each year approximately 5,000 under 21-year-olds die as a result of underage drinking, (Underage Drinking).             Raising awareness about underage drinking is definitely necessary in today’s society and who better to lead the way than the alcohol companies themselves. Alcohol companies should be required to run advertisements that promote alcohol awareness to underage groups.            Wyatt Dubois, Professor at Penn State, completed a study on how to counter the negative effects of traditional alcohol ads, or those who do not support any kind of alcohol awareness. His findings along with others support the claim that alcohol ads do have negative effects on children, causing them to drink and create the desire to drink illegally.  His findings also show that after educating the under agers about alcohol and the purpose for the ads, the children were less likely to drink and had a more realistic view of alcohol. During the study children were also taught the difference and the motives of alcohol ads so that they would understand that they were Armitage 3just ads. The students learned to distinguish that these ads are produced by people working for money for companies that sold the product. These ads were produced by people just doing their jobs. The results, these students were less likely to drink. As a result of the negative results administered by children after viewing certain alcohol ads, the alcohol companies should be responsible for providing alcohol awareness promoting advertisements. After promoting alcohol awareness by educating under agers Alcohol Companies will be countering the effects of their regular ads and fulfilling their duties as responsible marketers. The professor who conducted the experiments won an honor for his research and findings. (Dubois).            In addition to filling a requirement or a responsibility by distributing ads promoting alcohol awareness and educating the youth of America alcohol companies will be subduing their opposition. If companies do comply they will satisfy the oppositions claim that the alcohol companies have nothing but negative effects on under agers. By producing these ads alcohol companies will have countered the effects of their other ads. Their opposition will no longer have anything to impose, less lawsuits, less hassle and a lot less headaches.     Not only will these ads cause alcohol companies to satisfy their opposition it will create many new job opportunities in the advertising and marketing fields. Advertising is one of the most competitive job markets, and with the creation of new opportunities it’s only going to get better for the employer and the employee. Also, with the creation of new jobs this ensures that the commercials will be educational, effective, and worthwhile. There will be groups and committees focused specifically on this, so that there will be no room for errors. The possibilities are endless. More advertisements mean more advertising associates and more PR.Armitage 4   Everyone had heard the phrase; “all PR is good Pr.” This is extremely true in the case of these alcohol companies. Think about it their company logo is going to plastered all over these ads, as it is at the end of the adult focused drink responsibly commercials for example. Children and young adults when they are of legal drinking age are going to remember the names of those companies who educated them on drinking, and think higher of these companies. If companies are willing to produce commercials that raise awareness, viewing audiences are going to reward them in a positive manner usually with their monetary support when they are legally able to drink. All PR is good PR is right.An even better way to step up the PR pitch, for the alcohol companies would be to pair with a group like Above the Influence, an awareness group, to ensure audiences that the companies are serious about the issues. Above the Influence raises awareness about all other drugs to young adults and children why not alcohol? This would be a very positive PR move and step in fulfilling the need for underage alcohol awareness.As of right now America’s youth views over 2,000 alcohol related commercials a year. Youths also view 45 percent more beer ads and 27 percent more liquor ads in magazines than do people who are legally allowed to consume alcohol (Alcohol Advertising and Youth). This much exposure to such vulnerable and impressionable minds, to such testy and construed realities, is that of concern among parents everywhere.  Why would young people not want to try or be tempted to try something that “makes you look so cool” on television, or in ads posted all around them?  Models, actors, and other celebrity spokespersons all make drinking alcohol look so appealing. The men in the ads that Armitage 5bring the alcohol to parties always get the ‘hott’ women. The ‘hott’ women who order drinks with an attractive accent always get eye boggling looks from the bartender. Advertisements are sending mixed messages to children across America. A study conducted to test whether alcohol advertisements and the amount of exposure, affect alcohol consumption by youth. The findings were that youth who were exposed more drank more. This article is complete with graphs, statistics, and the whole nine yards. This source supports the argument because it proves that alcohol advertisements increases drinking among youth (Snyder).Children in America are brought to think that alcohol is something for adults only because of the twenty one year old and above only drinking law. Therefore, these advertisements only reinforce their urge to grow up faster and to experience this tantalizing world that is portrayed in the ads. If alcohol wasn’t viewed as such a forbidden fruit, then young adults wouldn’t be so tempted to try it.Alcohol advertisers have used, in recent years, cartoon characters and other childlike mascots to sell their products. The most famous are used by Budweiser. Who can forget the Budweiser frogs? Not many, especially children who when the frogs were first released identified the frogs more than Tony the Tiger, who adorned the box of cereal the children ate for breakfast. Power Rangers and Smoky the Bear also fell behind the three slimy salesmen (McKenzie). Other kiddy appealing mascots include Dalmatians, horses, and other animals. The most common places these appear include the Super Bowl. Adults who are legally able to drink do respond to different child like actions and scenarios, because they make them feel youthful and fun. However, this is not usually the case for alcohol.Armitage 6If this is how the opposition to alcohol companies feel today then, why not satisfy them by adding these new commercials and increase the PR that youths are already being exposed to. It has always been easier to add something than to try and take something back. Once the damage is done, it’s done so why not just fix it by countering the effects which will benefit both sides? As of now the same multi-billion dollar corporations that are producing these negative ads are in compliance 99% with the Federal Trade Commission’s requests and requirements regulating media viewers (Alcohol and Advertising). This proves that there is a need for both these awareness commercials and a requirement for them.One company in particular is already taking the first steps to ensure good PR and responsible advertising. That company would be Anheuser-Busch Companies, INC. is taking the opportunity to support April Alcohol Awareness month. During the month of April A-B has dedicated over one-million dollars to raise awareness about underage and illegal drinking, drinking and driving, and other forms of alcohol abuse. Their awareness ads will appear on radio, television and in the form of their “Family Talk about Drinking Program.” A-B has brought in many professionals ranging from counselors to vehicle enforcement officials to help raise awareness. This is definitely one small step but it is a step. (A-B Supporting). Producing ads that raise alcohol awareness to parents and underage youths is a positive idea and beneficial to both sides of the argument. It is a win-win situation. Great PR benefits and future customers, and clear consciouses and happy parents with informed youths. The need is  Armitage 7there so voice your support, and hopefully it shouldn’t be long before advertisements starting out with a confused teenage male will be gracing television screens everywhere.               Armitage 8Works Cited”A-B supporting April’s “alcohol awareness month.” - Anheuser-Busch, Companies Inc“. Modern Brewery Age. April 6, 1992. FindArticles.com. 15 Apr. 2008. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3469/is_n14_v43/ai_12418817″Alcohol Advertising and Youth.” American Academy of Family Physicians Policy and Advocacy. 26 Feb. 2008 <http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/policy/policies/a/alcoholadvertising.html>.  “Alcohol and Advertising.” Alcohol News. Stats At George Mason University. 28 Feb. 2008 <www.alcoholnews.org/advertising2.html>.  Dubois, Wyatt. “Study on Countering Effects of Alcohol Ads on Kids Wins Professor Best Paper Honor.” Penn State Smeal College of Business. 18 Jan. 2008. Penn State. 27 Feb. 2008 <http://www.smeal.psu.edu/news/latest-news/jan08/goldberg.html>.  McKenzie, Spud. “Alcohol Adverising and Youth.” The Marin Institute. 25 Feb. 2008 <http://www.marininstitute.org/Youth/alcohol_ads.htm>.  Snyder, Leslie B., Frances Fleming Milici, Micheal Slater, Helen Sun,  and Yuliya Strizhakova. “Effects of Alcohol Advertising Exposure on Drinking Amoung Youth.” Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. 1 Jan. 2006. 25 Feb. 2008 <http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/160/1/18>.  “ Underage Drinking.”Alcohol Alert. Alcohol Research & Health, Volume 28, Number 3, 2004/2005.

Posted in Instructor, Kadey Armitage | 1 Comment »

My Religious Views of the Death Penalty

April 15th, 2008

My Religious Views of the Death Penalty

Death is different from any other penalty or punishment imposed under our system of criminal justice. It is irreversible. Because of this uniqueness, our society demands that the death penalty be imposed only under sentencing procedures that are fair and unbiased, that are not the result of chance, and that do not create a great amount of risk that it will be inflicted in a cruel or unusual manner. We have definitely fallen short of these goals at times in our history.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Authors, Chelsea Kilty, Instructor | 1 Comment »

Church and State: Separate Entities Entirely

April 15th, 2008

 By: Marlena

The United States is considered the most integrated country in the world. What would happen if this changed? Many people are probably asking, how could that possibly happen? Well, currently a policy of separation of church and state is installed in the U.S. This means that everyone in the country has freedom of religion and that the government will not adopt a single religion to rule the country. However, if this policy is dissolved, the country will be literally divided. The United States is a melting pot but if the citizens no longer have the right to practice their own religion, and therefore will either leave the country or be forced to practice in secret. The United States would never be the same. The separation of church and state must be upheld because that is the way it is written in the Constitution and it is the only way that the United States will remain a strong nation.

            The First Amendment is interpreted in different ways but one thing is for sure, the religious clause of the first amendment clearly states:

           “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free  exercise thereof.” (Tomlinson 4).

Why is the First Amendment interpreted differently? Well, many believe that the founders of the Constitution had such different beliefs that there has to be more than simply the literal meaning of the words. A separationist believes that the First Amendment literally means what it states and that church and state should continue to stay separated (What to do About the First Amendment 3). This separationist point of view is very correct because who cares if the founders had different beliefs. If they felt differently about how the country should be run than when they were drafting the Constitution, they would have clearly expressed their opinions within the document. It is obvious that the founders of the constitution had different opinions on many things, but there are not multiple sets of the amendments stating the opinions of the framers of this country. There is just one set of rules and that is the U.S. Constitution (Cline, para 6) Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Instructor, Marlena Hendry | 1 Comment »

Death Penalty

April 8th, 2008

Benjamin Waldron

The Death Penalty

The death penalty is not a cruel and unusual punishment because it has been used throughout history as an effective means of deterring criminals.  Our history and culture largely influenced by Great Britain, has shown that the death penalty was not considered immoral by any stretch of the imagination.  As far back as Babylon and King Hammurabi’s law code, which specified twenty-five crimes as punishable by execution, the death penalty was used. Even if it was considered harsh by some the death penalty remains a strong deterrent against criminals. 

            In the beginning of the United States each state had its own rules about the death penalty.  The first person to be executed in the U.S. was Captain George Kendall in 1608 for being a spy for the Spanish in the Jamestown Colony of Virginia.  Kendall was hanged for his crime.  This is where we get our laws on treason. 

            While the objections to some of the methods of the death penalty may be legitimate such as lethal injection or crucifixion, the death penalty should remain.  The historical beginnings of the movement to abolish the death penalty find its root in the European writers Montesquieu, Voltaire, and Bentham.  Religion also contributed to a number of ant-death men such as the English Quaker John Bellers and John Howard.  Among all of these men the one who cut the deepest was Cesare Beccaria’s essay On Crime and Punishment that had the deepest impact on the admittedly harsh British law.  Some might argue that the death penalty has in no way deterred the death penalty from happening because the crime rate is at an all time high according to the Federal Department of Crime and Justice, also that the one of the top five listed crimes is murder.

            I would answer this by saying that the death penalty is not used enough and when it is, it is slow and far between because of the legal system.  Now I am all for everyone being given every chance to defend themselves but most of the time appeals are just beating a dead horse.  Lawyers try to buy as much time as they can so they can squeeze as much money as they can out of their clients and give them a few extra days.  Plus the whole death row thing is old anybody on it should be executed within a few months of being put on it.  What is the sense in dragging out the process by useless procedure.

           

Posted in Instructor | No Comments »

Capital punishment: Good or Bad?

March 22nd, 2008

by Kyle

The death penalty has been a huge debate in the United States and other countries around the world. The struggle is that many people are claiming it to be inhumane and that it violates their human rights. So here is several peoples’ opinion on how this is a cruel and unusual way to die, how it is affecting our nation and others, and that it should be put to an end. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Authors, Kyle Wimp | 1 Comment »

Budweiser Frogs vs. Tony the Tiger- the Essay

March 22nd, 2008

by Kadey

Kadey Armitage

Professor Jones

English 1302

16 March 2008                            

                                                            The Budweiser Frogs vs. Tony the Tiger           

                    Advertising one of the most fast paced, high paying, competitive job markets on the planet. It is also one of the few job markets that success is measured on how well the public is directly affected by the product produced. That being said, what if the item being promoted through the advertisement is one of controversy? What if there existed a great opportunity in the market to advertise a particular product of debate? What if some viewed the means to be successful when selling the product unethical or irresponsible? What if there was a legality issue surrounding the product sold?

      When flipping through magazines, television channels, or passing billboards ones eye may come across over and over again pictures images and conversations about alcohol. These strategically placed advertisements were published to catch the eye and entice anyone who was willing to look. This can be looked at as both a positive and a negative. The positive side the advertisers are doing their jobs, and their business will benefit. The negative side includes the effect of viewers whom aren’t at the appropriate age to participate in the activities portrayed and whom then develop a falsified version of the alcohol ‘realm.’ When does the effect on our children overturn the value of the American dollar? This question is the basis for the debate surrounding alcohol advertising. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Instructor, Kadey Armitage | 2 Comments »

Budweiser Frogs vs. Tony the Tiger

March 20th, 2008

by Kadey 

The aspect of the drinking age I chose to focus on was the effect of alchol avertising  on children and their decision to drink. Some of the points I plan on covering include the following:

1) The warped version of the lifestyle of those who drink. In advertisements only the positive usually upscale side of drinking is shown. There is never commercials showing some young woman, bent over a porch rail having her best freind holding her hair back, while she tosses up everything including yesterdays frenchfries. No, the side portrayed, the side that influences kids to drink is that of models ordering expensive cocktails flirting with the bartender. Or guys who get the chicks by buying a certain drink. I want to find out why there is only commericals that show this side and not the other? I also chose to inlcude this topic because the drinking reality portrayed is one sided, and a lot more desirable, thus influencing  young adults to want to become part of this awesome adult world sooner, and illegaly. This to me is one of the major problems with alcohol advertising. Yes, I know that sex sells, and in advertising that’s what determines your paycheck, however, it is also a little irresponsible.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Instructor, Kadey Armitage | No Comments »

What did we do befor we had to be 21

March 18th, 2008

What would we do if there was no legal drinking age?  Would there be there be kids just getting drunk all the time.  Would parents be force to come up with someother excuse for thier children not drinking, other than you not old enough.  What would be the main reason for people under the age of 21 not to grab a beer after a hard days work.

In 1984 states of the usa were giving the choice to raise the legal drinking age to 21 or lose there fedral highway fund.  According to Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the organization primarily responsible for pushing the act through the legislature, the nationwide proportion of drivers 16-20 years of age who were involved in fatal crashes, and were intoxicated, dropped 33 percent from 1988 to 1998.

 In MADD’s statement above regarding the 33% drop in the proportion of drivers 16-20 years of age who were involved in fatal crashes, and were intoxicated, they fail to mention that the proportion of these intoxicated drivers aged 21-24 and 25 or older dropped drastically as well, according to the Centers for Disease Control.  Drivers aged 16-20 are involved in about 13% of all alcohol-related fatal accidents, so that is probably the group they mean. But they fail to mention that this is about the same percentage of non-alcohol-related fatal accidents they are involved in - which would indicate that driving experience, rather than alcohol, might be the problem for this group.  They also ignore the 21-24 year olds, whose share of alcohol-related accidents is even higher.  This all means that the group responsable for the legistlation pushing the bill threw, bends the information to support thier cause.  I do think that the group MADD is a good group to have around, but i think that they should inform people of all age groups and not just single out the young people of the drinking world.

 How could keeping people from drinking until the age of 21 stop so many fatal accidents for people over 21?  It probably didn’t.  After the nation’s drinking age was raised to 21, the 21-24 age group quickly assumed the greatest share of alcohol-related fatal accidents.  In The Scapegoat Generation (p.210), author Mike Males presents his findings that the first year or two after a person can legally drink alcohol - regardless of what age is chosen - is the period in which that person is most likely to be involved in an alcohol-related accident. 

Surveys of college students show greater differences.  In Wechsler, et al. “College Binge Drinking in the 1990s” (Journal of American College Health), v.48 no.1, 2000, p. 199-210), the authors found an increasing “polarization” between abstainers and heavy drinkers on college campuses, with fewer students who reported drinking moderately.  Between 1993 and 1999, the authors recorded an increase of 24.7% in students who consider themselves “abstainers”, and an increase of 14.5% in “frequent binge drinkers”.  In 1999, 44.1% of the students surveyed identified themselves as frequent or occasional heavy drinkers; 36.6% were classified as “nonbinge” or moderate drinkers, and 19.2% didn’t drink at all.

Dr. William DeJong, an instructor at the Harvard School of Public Health, was recently quoted in *Advances: the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Quarterly Newsletter* (issue 1, 1999) as saying:

 ”Just about everyone in the substance abuse field
 says the nature of drinking has changed over the
 past 15 years or so.  Teens … are doing what we
 call industrial-strength binging.  They use all
 kinds of apparatus - funnels, beer bongs, pumps.
 There’s an intensity to it that you seldom saw
 years ago.”

These comments should surprise no one who understands human nature!  Fifteen years before the above statement was made, there was no National Minimum Drinking Age.  Prior to that, alcohol use by high school students - within limits - was looked upon as a normal form of experimentation and a mild exercise in rebellion.  Drinking by 18-20 year olds was a legal, acceptable part of their adult lives, something they were expected to learn to do responsibly.  But since the mid-1980s, people under 21 have been considered so incapable of handling alcohol that they are no longer even permitted to touch sealed containers of beer or wine on their jobs.  Any drinking by anyone under 21 has come to be considered criminal behavior.  When one is labeled “irresponsible”, when one engages in behavior that is considered “criminal”, the concept of moderation ceases to have much meaning.

The reason for the change in the first place can be traced back to one woman, Candy Lightner.  Candy Lightner who founded the organization, MADD, after a drunk driver killed her daughter in 1980. After that traumatic event Lightner turned her grief into activism and founded the powerful lobbying organization that claimed a membership of three hundred thousand in 44 states by 1984. Candy’s daughter was killed by a druck driver and she felt the need to do something about it.  Her doing somethin about it resulted in lowereing the drinking age.  This took the responsabilty of parents teaching thier children about alchola out of thier hand and into the goverments.   If the law is passed then the age for legal drinking age would be set at 21.  This makes it eaiser for parents because ussaly kids are already out of the house. 

Being 21 to drink makes no sence to me for many reasons but mainly because at this age you are on your own.  At the age of 18 your in your own house with your own parrents not in a bar with a bunch of friends that just turned 21 as well.  Instead of upping the drinking age law enforcment should have been involved.  Harsher fines and repercutions should have been inforced for drunk driving not punishing lower age groups for one daughter being killed by a drunk driver.

Posted in Chris Lane | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries