Second Amendment Rights

After the recent appearence of several armed citizens at President Obama's healthcare rallies, the right to bear arms has come back into the national spotlight. There was a small group of protesters that brought semi-authomatic assault rifles to the meetings, while others wore their holstered pistols. In states like Arizona and New Hampshire, residents are permitted to carry their weapons as long as they're properly registered.

The Second Amendment of the Constitution states that, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The most controversial aspect of this amendment lies in the interpretation of what a reasonable "arm" is in 2009. Moreover, how much should the government be able to restrict US citizens' ability to own a firearm?

The Healthcare debate illicts passionate feelings on both sides. These Townhall meetings that members of Congress and the President are holding draw hundreds if not thousands of protesters on each side of this issue. Critics of guns rights advocates are maintaining that the second amendment should not give permission to carry a semi-automatic weapon in public nevermind a passionate political event. On the other hand, guns rights proponents argue that an armed citizenry, in any environment, is what protects us from government oppression.

What do you think? Should firearms be allowed at these public meetings or is this going too far? Does the Second Amendment allow us to carry firearms (of any kind) in public? What do you think the framers of the Constitutions would say about this controversy?

Norton High School Blog Critique

Please post your critiques of Mr. Kefors Blocks B and F Blogs. Remember that you should be providing constructive criticism, aspects you liked, and general comments regarding the Sudanese Crisis.

Should the United States Boycott the Olympics?

The International Olympic Committee's controversial decision to allow China to host the 2008 summer Olympics has angered many nations. Many feel that China's poor human rights record and recent dealings with Tibet warrant full-scale boycotts of the 2008 games. After the recent protests in Paris, London, and San Francisco President Bush issued a statement say that he WILL attend the opening ceremonies.

The question that has been debated regarding China and the Olympics is as follows: Are the Olympics a proper venue to voice political protests? Should the Olympic games remain seperate from politics? Does China's human rights violations and dealings with Tibet warrant a United States Boycott of the games?

What do you think?

2nd Amendment and Gun Control

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,, the right of the people to bear arms, shall not be infringed."
2nd Amendment


The interpretation of the second Amendment is once again causing debate throughout the nation. The phrase, "the right to bear arms" has always been a point of debate due to the ambiguity of what an "arm" has come to mean in our society. Why did the founding fathers include this amendment in the Bill of Rights? Did the framers of the constitution want an armed citizenry in order to protect against foreign invaders? Should everyone be allowed to own a firearm? What is a reasonable firearm to own and what should be considered an unreasonable firearm to own?
These questions are ones that the Supreme Court is dealing with now. The District of Columbia has had a firearms ban within the city limits since 1973. Recently, this decision has been brought back to the Supreme Court due to questions of its constitutionality. Read the article (website below) and tell me YOUR opinion.
-Should the 2nd Amendment be abridged in any form? In other words, should local or state governments have the power to limit American Citizens right to own a weapon?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/washington/13scotus.html?_r=2&sq=2nd%20Amendment&st=nyt&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&scp=1&adxnnlx=1207065853-2NwW3WLyqR0dQDV4YhK4Sg&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

Women in Combat?

Some Americans feel that women should not be serving on the front lines or in "forward positions". The arguments against women fighting along side men in combat situations are varied and often supported by those in the US Armed Forces. However, many contend that women are just as reliable as men on the front lines and any arguments to the contrary are sexist. At a time when recruitment to the army is at a very low point, do you think that women should be allowed to fight on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan?

"Women are suffering post-traumatic stress disorder at higher rates than men. We know that women in general feel more negative emotional consequences from physical aggression. Surveys show that women in the military, especially enlisted women, don't want to go into combat. The percentage of women enlistees is going down, and that seems to be tied to their exposure to combat."

Kingsley Browne 2007

What do YOU think?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-04-28-female-amputees-combat_x.htm

Teachers' Bias?

We all have opinions regarding the controversial topics that we've been discussing this semester. It is impossible to study issues like the war in Iraq, the death penalty, abortion, gay marriage, etc without dissagreeing with someone. These personal beliefs that you have formed, and are in the process of forming, have been shaped by a variety of forces. Our families, peer groups, and our location in America all have an influence on why we believe the way we do.

With that being said, I also have opinions on these subjects. I try very hard not to tell you my own stances in the hopes that you will be able to base your opinions on OBJECTIVE information. If I told you guys my opinions on Iraq, Gay Marriage, ect would you be more likely to feel the same way I do?

Blog Question: Should teachers make an attempt to always teach objectively? In other words, should a teacher present both sides of the issue equally and not express their own personal beliefs? OR Is it acceptable for a teacher to express their own beliefs and bias while teaching?

Crisis In Darfur: How Should America Respond?

The Genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan has already claimed approximately 400,000 lives and forced over 1.5 million people to flee their country. The United Nations response has been slowed by the Arab-controlled Sudanese Government and overwhelmed African Union forces.

The United States has given $270 Million to help solve this humanitarian crisis. In these difficult financial times, many Americans feel that we should concentrate on solving United States' domestic problems first then concentrate on aiding other nations and peoples. What do you think? Should US taxdollars be spent trying to help these refugees and stop future attrocities against the civilian population in Sudan? OR Should our tax dollars be spent solving domestic problems like health care, unemployment, house foreclosures, etc.?