Amendment 64 and Sports

Even though Amendment 64, the legalization of recreational marijuana use, passed in Colorado and Washington, the NFL and the NBA are still enforcing the strict policies against smoking marijuana. I think that it is really smart for the NBA and the NFL to still enforce the laws in the states because the athletes of the two leagues are role models to kids everywhere. In this article, http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2012/11/07/nfl-marijuana-substance-abuse-policy-colorado-washington/1688971/ it talks about how the kids in little league are wearing pink in October for Breast Cancer awareness and doing anything they can to do to be like the players in the NFL. Even kids on the school football team were wearing pink during home games to support Breast Cancer like the players in the NFL do. The players of the two leagues influence a lot of young athletes to be inspired by the game they play and love. I know as a basketball player, I look up to the players in the NBA for how they present themselves on and off the court. With marijuana still being illegal under federal law, the players of the leagues would be breaking federal law which would ruin the way people view that player. I think a great way to describe what will happen to their career was a line in the article that said, "light up a joint and a sports career can go up in smoke." I think that is completely true because that player will loose their job and potentially any endorsements that they have. Tiger Woods is a good example of a career that went downhill quickly because of a mistake and smoking marijuana while in such a high profiled profession is definitely a mistake that can ruin a career.

Death Penalty

There are many stages in a death penalty case and there are some of which protect the rights of the people accused. In the pre-trial stage, the court makes sure that there is a suitable jury for the case. This protects the rights of the accused because the court makes sure that there aren't people are clearly biased to the death penalty on the jury because then those jurors would automatically choose the death penalty for the accused. In the Penalty stage you have mitigating factors that protect the rights of the accused. The mitigating factors are things that affect the person in a way that could potentially lessen the punishment of the crime. Mental illness is a mitigating factor because the accused cannot help the fact that they have a mental illness that can interfere with decision making. Clemency stage also protects the rights of the accused because if the person is innocent they can see a pardon board to reduce punishment. The methods of the death penalty are hanging, firing squad, lethal injection, gas chamber and electrocution. As I believe that none of these are humane, if I had to choose i would choose the lethal injection. It seems to be the least painful considering the only pain that you really feel is when they put the IV in and everyone has had at least one shot in their lifetime. The two that I believe should most definitely be considered cruel and unusual punishment are electrocution and gas chamber. With all of the methods they do end up dying but these two seem the most torturous because the process can take longer and the prisoner could struggle during the process. In the gas chamber it is recommended to breathe deeply to speed up the process and some disregard that making their death drawn out and having to deal with dying at a slow pace. There are a lot of states that don't have the death penalty. The state of Illinois and some surrounding states don't have the death penalty but other than those states it is spread out through the country which states have the it and which states don't. I thought that is there sort of is a regional trend because as in the Midwest area, the area by New Jersey also doesn't have the death penalty.  California has the highest amount of inmates on death row with 724 and California also has the most women on death row with 19 inmates. There aren't any statistics for juveniles on death row because in the court case Roper v. Simmons is was ruled unconstitutional according to the 8th amendment to use the death penalty on anyone under the age of 18. This data tells us that even though there are a lot of places that still have the death penalty, there are states that are getting rid of the death penalty at the same time. The state by state data tells us how the death penalty was used mostly before 1976. I think that some of the parts of Illinois Death Penalty Statute are fair and make sense but some crimes don't deserve death as a punishment. The parts that are fair is that if someone was to kill someone who is disabled, elderly or torture was intended. People that kill like that have something seriously wrong with their brain if they feel okay killing someone that is elderly or disabled. The state by state data doesn't tell us why Illinois got rid of the death penalty but I can conclude that Illinois took away the death penalty for the reasons that it wasn't as effective as it is in other states. The death penalty is frequently used in states like Texas, California or Oklahoma but in a state like Illinois there were only so many executions since 1976 compared to the states. In the article it says that in Texas it costs 2.3 million dollars for a death penalty case which is three times the amount it costs to keep someone in a single cell high security prison for 40 years. The economics of the death penalty is that it generally costs more using the death penalty than it does to keep someone in jail for life. The racial factor for the death penalty is that there are more whites executed and more whites in death penalty cases The public opinion is pretty split up between the decisions of the death penalty, life with parole, life without parole, life with parole plus restitution and no opinion. The majority of the people through would rather have the prisoner in prison for life with or without parole rather than have the prisoner go through the death penalty. I thought that the views of the Death Penalty Information Center were that they are against the death penalty. It is convincing because a lot of the statistics that I saw were talking about how expensive it was to use the death penalty over putting the person in prison. They also used statistics talking about how race isn't really a factor in deciding whether or not the person should be getting the death penalty, if they should be getting the penalty at all. 

Election

As the election gets closer, I still don't know who I would vote for. I'm not old enough to vote but it's good to still pay attention to what each candidate represents in the election. There are certain issues where I am still undecided who I agree with. President Obama makes a good point about not wanting the insurance companies to bully the elderly anymore but does the whole United States need the same health insurance coverage? Or is it the states duty to decide what the coverage will be for the residents of the state. The most important thing to me in this election is that the future President creates more jobs and tries harder to lessen the national debt. Having more jobs in the future is important to me because people pay a ton of money to attend universities and then their hard work and money is gone to waste if there are no jobs for them to have. Choosing a candidate to be President would be very hard for me considering I have a 50/50 view on most of the issues.

Health Care Debate

During our research project in class about an issue, I chose to search about health care. After hearing the two candidates positions, I agreed that President Obama's was working for the United States even if Governor Romney disagreed. President Obama's plan is very similar to the plan that Governor Romney had in Massachusetts so I am a little confused as to why he is so against the plan itself. I know that Governor Romney wants the states to be in charge of their own health plans but if the plan was suitable for Romney then, why is it not suitable now? I also agreed with the part of President Obama's plan that talks about insurance company abuse. It isn't fair to the people that get sick to have their insurance dropped because they can't help that they get sick. By having the insurance company dropping those people that get sick it causes the people that are sick to go bankrupt because of the money that they are spending on medical bills. By people spending all of their money on medical bills, it's causing the poverty rate to increase which is never a positive thing for the United States.

Life after high school

After high school there are a lot of options for people to do. Kids can get jobs and go to community college or they can attend college like most students at Deerfield do. I always wondered about how one makes the decision of what they are going to do after high school. Deciding which college to go will the hardest decision I will make in all my 17 years. Most people go off of what they are most passionate about. I read an article about an 18 year old that didn't go to college to make iPhone apps. Spencer Costanzo is probably really passionate about making apps and that's what he wanted to do after high school. Here is a link of a Q&A with Spencer, http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/how-a-teenager-snubbed-college-toi-build-an-apps-empire-.html.In the article it talks about how he got started, how he made the decision to not go to college, what his parents thought and ways to inspire other kids that want to create a business like Spencer did.

College Applications

The application process is something that is pretty stressful for most people. I've heard stories that make me dread filling out the application. My friend has to write 11 separate essays and that has stressed me out beyond belief. After looking at the applications of the six schools I'm applying to, I realized I really don't have anything to worry about. Two of the school don't require an essay and I can use the same essay for the four other schools. With schools not having an essay I wonder if I'm setting myself up to fail in college by not preparing well for the school itself or if the schools I'm applying to are not good schools. Thinking about whether or not the school is good makes the process even more stressful.

University of Alabama speech codes

At the University of Alabama their speech codes are restricted and as a prospective student of the University this is a good thing. I know that my speech is restricted but growing up I have always been aware of what to say and if it is at the right time or place. You have to know your audience and what the environment is around you. I hope that at Alabama they would disapprove of the parties that we read about at Auburn. Being a school in the south as well, there have been struggles with slavery and seeing a party like that on campus is unacceptable. I don't think that the speech codes go against my rights because they have to regulate the school somehow and protecting people's rights are important. I agree with the perspectives of the FIRE website because I like that they protect students speech at universities.