Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged penalty

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Bryan Pregon

Iowa Lawmaker Wants To Bring Back The Death Penalty - 1 views

www.wowt.com/...e-Death-Penalty-182678981.html

shared by Bryan Pregon on 10 Dec 12 - No Cached
  • joecarbis on 10 Dec 12
     
    I think life in prison would be worse than the death penalty to begin with
  • ...33 more comments...
  • Natalie Wilson on 10 Dec 12
     
    I think the death penalty is pointless. In my opinion all it does is give horrible criminals an easy way out. If I did something horrible enough to get the death penalty, I'd rather die than serve life in prison.
  • caseyyard on 10 Dec 12
     
    Yup we are for sure with out a doubt falling back into a dark age.
  • garrett lee on 10 Dec 12
     
    i think we should have the death penalty
  • gharvey949 on 10 Dec 12
     
    Capital punishment is scarier than going to jail. I think crime rates would go down if this came back.
  • Ryan Loye on 10 Dec 12
     
    I think that the death penalty is wrong because they are trying to stop a murderer by murdering him themselves so really it's not much better then what the killer was doing himself.
  • Melissa Diaz-Aguilera on 10 Dec 12
     
    What would happen if the person was innocent after all?
  • Molly Wyant on 10 Dec 12
     
    Yea its pointless cuz then there not going sever there crime and its a easy way out
  • blakewilladsen on 10 Dec 12
     
    It will be interesting to hear Sorenson's argument as to why to changes things. Prisons are getting crowded but this is still Iowa. We still have a small population
  • jessicavaldez on 10 Dec 12
     
    I think the death penalty is not a bad idea nor I think it is a good idea. They will suffer in jail or suffer in hell. My opinion is put them in jail. If it is not their time to die yet then it is not. If they did something as bad as kill someone then they do deserve to go to jail and suffer for life.
  • Melissa Christensen on 10 Dec 12
     
    I would agree with harvey. The crime rates would go down and death penalties are effective in other regions.
  • aaron valdivia on 10 Dec 12
     
    Its not weather which one is worse, its that killing a person for killing another person is not only hypocritical but inhumane to today's society.
  • Jeremy Vogel on 11 Dec 12
     
    I disagree with bringing the death penalty back to Iowa. We've taken it away twice, once in 1872 and the second time in 1965, so I feel that shows that we, as a state, don't want it. Also the death penalty isn't really a deterrent for crime. There is a really interesting website that shows so facts about murder rates and comparing states that do and don't have the death penalty. They have a ton of information and I would recommend that you go through the site a little if you're interested in this topic. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state#MRord
  • joecarbis on 11 Dec 12
     
    I agree with Aaron, but i also think that justice should be served
  • Dylan Garner on 11 Dec 12
     
    Aaron giving someone the death penalty is acceptable. Having life in prison is worse anyway and it just puts more people in danger if that person is still alive.
  • bvasquez13 on 11 Dec 12
     
    better for the death penalty then life in prison.
  • gharvey949 on 11 Dec 12
     
    Maybe we need to start corporal punishment.
  • aaron valdivia on 11 Dec 12
     
    Mr. Garner, it would cost more money to give somebody the death penalty then to have them spend life in prison. We live in a different type of world then when people had there heads chopped off and dragons happened to be there to save "johns" life. To me that's not what God intended us to do with people that made a mistake and yes a big one but everybody has a reason to something or there could be something seriously wrong with there head to commit a murder but its not always there fault.
  • blakewilladsen on 11 Dec 12
     
    For 2011, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.7, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.1 For 2010, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.6, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 2.9 For 2009, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.9, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 2.8 For 2008, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 5.2, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.3 http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state#MRord
  • jacob whalen on 12 Dec 12
     
    It seems like if the act of violence is bad enough to get the death penalty most of the people kill themselves before the law can.
  • joecarbis on 13 Dec 12
     
    Would you rather spend the rest of your life in prison or be dead? Think about that!
  • Dylan Garner on 13 Dec 12
     
    Mr. Valdivia how would it cost more to give the death penalty then to keep them in prison for life? That's right, IT WOULDN'T. And I'm not saying give the death penalty for 1 murder. Based on depravity and body counts they should be sentenced to death.
  • dalton burk on 13 Dec 12
     
    unless you commited that bad of a crime i wouldn't worry about it coming back if your not gonna kill people
  • Jeremy Vogel on 13 Dec 12
     
    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/CostsRptFinal.pdf Dylan pages 20 and 21 of the PDF I linked above, explain why the death penalty costs more to administer than life in prison with out parole. More specifically on page 20 under the heading Time on Death Row it says, "In California, a legislative commission concluded that it costs the state an extra $90,000 for each death row inmate per year compared to the costs of the same inmate housed in general population. With over 670 inmates on death row, that amounts to an additional yearly cost of $60 million solely attributable to the death penalty."
  • joecarbis on 14 Dec 12
     
    Lets keep it simple say the death penalty would be cheaper than housing an inmate for life. Boom, Roasted.
  • Dylan Garner on 14 Dec 12
     
    Well then we can change the process to a quick and easy death without all that court BS. And plus I'm a prison warden so you guys both don't know what you are talking about. Aaron. And Jeremy.
  • joecarbis on 14 Dec 12
     
    FALSE. There is NO WAY you're a prison warden. The minimum age for a Warden is 21, plus you have to have lots of training. So someone of your prestige and experience, (not to mention your practically a 5 year old) would never be able to be a warden. Kthnxbye
  • Dylan Garner on 14 Dec 12
     
    I am prison
  • Jared Holcomb on 14 Dec 12
     
    Dylan and Joe, The reason that the death penalty is more expensive (and always will be) is the courts have to make sure that the criminal that is convicted is 100 percent guilty. There can't be any room for doubt. This means that the state has to supply better (More expensive) lawyers for the suspected party, and the trial has to be more in depth, therefor much longer. We can't make this time shorter than it is, because as a country, we are will do everything we can to keep an Innocent man from dying. And to just keep the perpetrators in jail is much cheaper, as there is already a well set system in place, and one more person will not increase the cost of that system to go up in large amounts as much as the singled out attention a person on death row will.
  • Payton Whiteaker on 14 Dec 12
     
    @ Dylan and Joe, if you both still think that the death penalty is cheaper, you are wrong, look at the 20th page Jeremy posted. @ Jared, ethically speaking, shouldn't any person who is accused of murder have an outrageously expensive lawyer anyways? If someone is going to be imprisoned for life, or going to be executed for a crime, should the one being executed receive a better lawyer?
  • Jared Holcomb on 14 Dec 12
     
    I think they should, but the person being put to jail for life has the chance to have new evidence pop up, and potentially let them eventually get out, they have the chance to get out on parole, they have the potential for choices. The man that is getting the death penalty have to be 100 percent sure. They don't have room to make mistakes. Ethically, I believe that people getting put away for life should have the same standards of 100 percent, but as I said, they have choices later on down the road. The dead don't.
  • Dylan Garner on 18 Dec 12
     
    @ Payton. It is cheaper. I know for a fact. I AM A PRISON WARDEN.
  • Emili Davis on 18 Dec 12
     
    I think one would suffer more life in prison rather than getting the death penalty.
  • joecarbis on 19 Dec 12
     
    @Peyton Are you trying to tell me its more expensive to keep someone alive in prison? this means that dude lives off our tax money. You will literally pay for his food, housing, and heck, that dude can even go lift for 3 hours a day and run his block! THink about that. State Champ.
  • Payton Whiteaker on 19 Dec 12
     
    @ Dylan, you are not a prison warden, keep the topics on this page relevant to the conversation, and have some potential form of evidence to back up what you say. @ Joe, it is much less expensive to keep someone alive then execute them. The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. This process is needed in order to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit, and even with these protections the risk of executing an innocent person can not be completely eliminated. Example State: California How much they could save: With life in prison as the maximum punishment for 1st degree murder, they would save over 1 billion dollars a year. Money that could be saved per year for taxpayers: 90,000 dollars a year. Taxpayers save money if they do not use the death penalty. http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42 Besides, many murder victims PREFER the idea of Life without Parole. If you do not believe this, check out this site made by the victims families: https://www.aclunc.org/docs/criminal_justice/death_penalty/Voices_from_California_Crime_Victims_for_Alternatives_to_the_Death_Penalty.pdf I have the feeling that nobody will even look at these links, but they are blunt evidence that it is cheaper, and makes more people happy, then when we use the death penalty. Oh.... By the way, 2nd degree murders (who cannot receive the death penalty) can do all that which you stated before Joe. Why should first degree murders be any different?
  • Molly Wyant on 19 Dec 12
     
    The death penalty is dumb you should just let that sever his/or hers time in prison.
ataylor074

Virginia move to abolish death penalty part of broader wave of change - CSMonitor.com - 27 views

www.csmonitor.com/...nalty.-What-s-behind-the-shift

shared by ataylor074 on 15 Mar 21 - No Cached
  • ataylor074 on 15 Mar 21
     
    Do you guys think the death penalty should still be around?
  • ...23 more comments...
  • jackiegonzalez on 15 Mar 21
     
    It's hard to say because it's not right to take someone's life. I'm sure morality is a big part of why they're taking the death penalty away in Virginia. However, I've watch a lot of true crime shows to know that there are evil people in this world. Serial killers kill for fun and have no compassion for victims. It gets to the point where one wonders if they deserve their life because they've caused so much destruction. So, I guess, there's too many factors for me to have a set opinion.
  • tsilva588 on 15 Mar 21
     
    I do think that the death penalty still has its uses. Though it is still flawed the most recent method of lethal injection is still done incorrectly so I believe that once we find the most reasonable way it should be in play.
  • kredding147 on 15 Mar 21
     
    There are so many different factors that go into whether the death penalty is appropriate or not. Part of me thinks that if you do something horrible enough it's fair for people to want to take your life in exchange for what was taken from them. But part of me says that it's the coward's way out, that rotting in jail for the rest of their life is better than being able to just die and get away from it. You look back on cases like that of Jeffrey Dahmer and think "wow, why didn't he get the death penalty?", but he was beaten to death by fellow inmates later on in his sentence, so either way he was going to die. You look back at Ted Bundy and the horrific murders that he committed and you're glad he got the death penalty, right? A life for a life, it seems fair. There are just so many things that go into it and it's so personal and complicated for everyone.
  • nick_rice on 15 Mar 21
     
    I think that if somebody did something where they truly do deserve the death penalty then it should stick around for those terrible people who only harm society.
  • allisonwalker on 15 Mar 21
     
    I think the death penalty shouldn't be a thing anymore. Even this woman who lost her father at a young age doesn't want her father's killer to receive the death penalty. She wants justice, however not in the form of the death penalty. It should no longer exist anyway, it's cruel and people should have to pay for their crimes.
  • peytongrenoble on 15 Mar 21
     
    I agree yet disagree with the death penalty. First, I would say that it would give certain families who are for it justice for loved ones that were lost or hurt. Second, I would say that it would prevent future crimes from occurring if that person only had received a life sentence. On the other hand, I would say it is an "easy out" and certain families could be against it for that reason. Additionally, if that person was wrongfully killed, that would be completely on the court system and no justice would be served, it would be a longer, more "drug-out" process.
  • samhovey on 15 Mar 21
     
    I agree with Allison. The killing of a perpetrator is not justice. The death penalty is outdated and should be abolished.
  • aidan093 on 15 Mar 21
     
    I think the death penalty should still be a thing but I think that they need to change what crimes fit the death penalty.
  • eballenger on 15 Mar 21
     
    I think the death penalty should remain however I think it should only be if you killed another person on purpose or multiple people.
  • bklopp601 on 15 Mar 21
     
    I think it shouldn't be abolished because there are still many criminals out there that have done several bad things and but I also think that the death penalty should change the crimes it's in.
  • sydneykolln on 17 Mar 21
     
    I understand that there are bad people in the world and that the death penalty is sometimes used on those people. However, I believe that the death penalty is not morally right. The methods that are used can be flawed and not always go right. In the end, it's difficult to pick sides because I can see both reasons as to why it should or should not be used.
  • milo_nordman on 17 Mar 21
     
    I agree with Sydney, I don't think the death penalty is morally right. Even though there are awful people in the world, killing them doesn't bring justice to the people they've hurt.
  • saraivargas on 22 Mar 21
     
    The death penalty I feel is an oxymoron on its own. How are you going to prevent killing by killing? It makes no sense. I feel if the crime was super severe, maybe the family of the family could come up with a punishment. I just don't think it should be allowed, especially if it is for a petty crime. We are the only developed nation in the world that still has the death penalty.
  • vperez191 on 22 Mar 21
     
    They should punish the people that do bad things instead of giving them the death penalty because death is not scary
  • zeaksorensen on 22 Mar 21
     
    I think that the death penalty is a sort of necessity. If we don't have it, then murders and serial killers will be able to live, even though they contribute nothing to society.
  • arosas733 on 22 Mar 21
     
    I think that if someone committed a terrible crime such as murder or rape, the death penalty is reasonable. How can you let someone of that nature still live? I personally believe it would be giving them what they deserve, prevent it from happening again from that same person, and save jails money rather than basically giving them free food and shelter. Of course with major restrictions on why someone should get it, but I think it should most definitely still be around.
  • abbidominguez on 30 Mar 21
     
    I have mixed emotions about the death penalty. I know some families would consider the death penalty justice for those who have lost loved ones due to a murder or something of that sort. I also believe life in prison can have more of an effect on the person who committed the crime and they would have to think about what they did for the rest of their life knowing they will no longer have freedom. I don't really have a definite stance on the subject.
  • mcaamal on 30 Mar 21
     
    I dont agree with the death penalty. I dont think that they should have the power to take someones life away. And in some cases people used be given death penalty for things that they did not even do. I think that a life in prison is would be better because the wont be free they wont have a life anymore and they will die there. and in my opinion that is a good punishment.
  • lhunter952 on 12 Apr 21
     
    I think the death penalty should still be around. There are some extremely disgusting or disturbing things that people could do that deserve death. The only problem is that they need to be 100% sure the person is guilty so they don't kill someone for no reason.
  • samhovey on 12 Apr 21
     
    I believe that the accused should be able to decide between life in prison or death in these situations.
  • joeypo10 on 12 Apr 21
     
    I think the death penalty should still be around. Personally if I had one of my family members killed I would want the killer to have to suffer for life in prison rather than not having to face their consequences. The death penalty is just way of reassurance to make sure they wont do anything bad again.
  • tsilva588 on 12 Apr 21
     
    I believe that the death penalty has its uses in certain situations like on terrorists or mass killers. It's simple they killed many and it shouldn't be allowed to happen again and that's the cruel but necessary action. If someone that I cared about was gone because of someone id want my peace.
  • eballenger on 12 Apr 21
     
    I think they should have kept it for certain times where it was the best course of action.
  • samhovey on 19 Apr 21
     
    I think that the accused should be able to choose between life in prison or the death penalty.
  • vperez191 on 19 Apr 21
     
    they should not have the death penalty anymore. If someone does something really bad, they should get life in prison because they will forever suffer.
Bryan Pregon

Nebraska outlaws the death penalty - CNNPolitics.com - 17 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

shared by Bryan Pregon on 28 May 15 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 28 May 15
     
    "Six states have abolished capital punishment since 2007 -- Nebraska is now the seventh."
  • ...17 more comments...
  • denniseram on 08 Sep 15
     
    I think it was a good idea to outlaw the death penalty, personally because I don't think that you should take someones life in punishment of someone else's. "An eye for an eye." There's always another way to deal with this, not greet it with death. If anything, I'd sentence him to jail for most of his life or his whole life in that matter. But the Government itself can also make a mistake and accuse the innocent of murder and then give them death as a punishment. They'd be in the wrong. Death is more drastic to me then spending a few years in jail, (thinking about it in a family way).
  • seanveazie on 08 Sep 15
     
    Keeping someone in jail for their whole life takes millions of dollars paid from the tax payers. If their crime was drastic enough then I am fully in support of the death penalty. Jail is basically a long term time out chamber for people to get clean and think about what they did. If you have already murdered, or raped, or abused someone a thirty year wag of the finger is not going to change their behavior.
  • tiaross on 08 Sep 15
     
    I believe in the death penalty. Let's say there's a serial killer and he's already murdered a good amount of people. Would you really want that person to go on living his or her life after all the pain he caused for all of those families? I know I wouldn't.
  • amcintosh485 on 08 Sep 15
     
    I believe in the death penalty because if someone has already done a good amount of harm to others and they have died because of it then the person who committed the crime deserves the same. Keeping them in prison is just a waste of money and giving them to much time. They deserve nothing less and being in prison isn't going to change their behavior.
  • bharold850 on 08 Sep 15
     
    As a very liberal person myself, and the death penalty is a conservative policy for crime, I am happy to see a state so close to home abolish this penalty. We have prisons and judges and laws for a reason that will punish those who do bad things. What are we accomplishing by killing someone publicly for killing others?
  • allisonwolff on 08 Sep 15
     
    I belive the death penalty is okay becasue you have to commit a pretty serious crime to get the death penalty and really in that case you almost kind of deserve it because of the pain you caused to multiple people.
  • kaylawalden on 08 Sep 15
     
    The death penalty is a tricky subject to talk about, most people are strictly for the death penalty, or strongly against it. However, in my opinion, I believe that everything has a consequence to a set of actions. Is it necessary to kill somebody though? I think everyone deserves a second chance especially if they know they are in the wrong and trying to change their lives around. The type of crime the person committed is the key. Let's say a person committed murder, would you say "an eye for an eye?" and kill them too through the death penalty? If you were to do this, aren't you doing the same thing that they committed? Overall, I think it was wise that Nebraska outlawed the death penalty.
  • gillyhyde on 08 Sep 15
     
    I don't believe in the death penalty, because by killing someone who killed someone else it's hypocritical. I think it's wrong to kill anyone, even if they killed someone else. The death penalty also put innocent lives at risk, someone could have been framed for the murder. The death penalty also costs a lot of money, people think that it's okay because they think that it saves the government from spending money but we are still spending a lot. There are a lot better ways to avoid the death penalty, and there a lot of mentally ill patients killed by the death penalty.
  • sophiataylor001 on 08 Sep 15
     
    I believe that outlawing the death penalty is the right thing to do because you shouldn't fight fire with fire. It is wrong to show that killing, or any other act of the sort, is wrong by doing the same thing. It is also a good thing because there have been wrong accusations in the past, and the death penalty cannot be undone. If you argue for a just prosecution, they can live with the guilt of their crime in prison. If they felt no remorse then the person should get pyschiatric help to correct the situation. There is also data that says the death penality costs more than housing the prisoner because of the long appeal process.
  • katiepetersen005 on 08 Sep 15
     
    Spending jail time is to help you become a better person because you did something bad. Killing someone does not help them become better as a person.
  • kdamgaard on 08 Sep 15
     
    I believe in the death penalty, if someone has committed a big enough crime.I don't think it should be outlawed becuase If someone has tortured and/or murdered multiple people than they should.
  • ryanlegg on 09 Sep 15
     
    Moms freakin out by this she wont shut up about it its hilarious
  • Julia Gibler on 09 Sep 15
     
    I think it is good that states are starting to outlaw the death penalty. If someone kills someone why does it make it right for them to be killed even if its by the government. Today we see punishments like the electric chair as barbaric and years from now people will say the same thing about the death penalty.
  • austindueling1 on 11 Sep 15
     
    I think we should keep the death penalty why should we have people murder other people and live in prison the rest of their lives we should show them what the did to people i mean the deserve so i think we should keep the death penalty
  • jacobdizona on 11 Sep 15
     
    We should keep the death penalty because if you take a persons life or multiple peoples lives then yes the state should take yours. Only if it was on purpose, because you get in a car crash and kill someone from the impact that shouldn't really count because it wasn't intended. Also if someone gets life in prison they get everything pretty much handed to them and they don't to pay for it. For example Nikko Jenkins killed multiple people on multiple occasions and no justice happened for the family's who had to deal with the loss of a loved one because hes just going to prison for life.
  • casandrabristow on 11 Sep 15
     
    I think the death penalty is okay to have in every state. If you are willing to murder a person then you should be murdered yourself. The crime they commit should be used in the same way against them.
  • ryanlegg on 14 Sep 15
     
    but are you willing to take it yourself for a crime that's the question everyone fears.
  • chris563 on 17 Sep 15
     
    I think its okay if the person that going into it haves killed like 40 people and they in joy doing it but if you just kill some one on accident then its not right just to give them the death penalty, instead they should just be locked up.
  • Bryan Pregon on 02 Dec 15
     
    Bumped for discussion on Political Ideology.
whitneytoms

Ohio killer executed with controversial drugs - 0 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

news cnn

shared by whitneytoms on 16 Jan 14 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 17 Jan 14
     
    Interesting that we talked about the death penalty (8th Amendment issue) in class and then this story pops up! Do you guys feel the death penalty is an acceptable punishment? Is lethal injection the way to go or is there a more humane alternative?
  • ...1 more comment...
  • Lauren Nahnsen on 21 Jan 14
     
    I don't think the death penalty is acceptable. We are killing people that kill people to show people that killing people is wrong... It just doesn't make sense.
  • jsteenbock23 on 23 Jan 14
     
    I don't understand the death penalty. Sitting in jail for the rest of your life seems like a better way to punish killers rather than just killing them.
  • Jordan Freeaman on 30 Jan 14
     
    The simple fact behind the death penalty is that the person on death row can not harm or attempt to harm anyone in prison or out cause the people on death row are apparently a danger to everyone around them. Letting someone like that into prison is just going to set them free. They can now kill and get away with it all they are surrounded by is people that did bad so who will care in their mind. Death is the only way to make that not happen.
Abaigh Plummer

For Boston bombing victims, death penalty decision a 'step forward' - 0 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

shared by Abaigh Plummer on 31 Jan 14 - No Cached
maceep liked it
  • Abaigh Plummer on 31 Jan 14
     
    Federal prosecutors say they'll seek the death penalty against Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, arguing that he acted in "an especially heinous, cruel and depraved manner" and lacks remorse.
  • nlarsen15 on 04 Feb 14
     
    Going along with the Republican/Democratic Ideologies, Left-winged folks will probably be less for a death penalty, while Right-winged folks will probably more support it. At least that's what our notes say. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Bryan Pregon

Nebraska Death Penalty Intact Until Voters Weigh-In - 2 views

www.wowt.com/...Voters-Weigh-In-333336821.html

shared by Bryan Pregon on 16 Oct 15 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 16 Oct 15
     
    "The counting is finished and Nebraska's Death Penalty will remain on the books until voters have their say about what to do next."
  • ryanlegg on 21 Oct 15
     
    wow, nice ppl actually did something about it i'm surprised that anything happened at all.
Bryan Pregon

Council Bluffs Schools blocking Facebook - 3 views

goo.gl/q4Sc8

shared by Bryan Pregon on 04 Oct 12 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 04 Oct 12
     
    I am curious if you agree or disagree with the decision. Here are excerpts from three documents the school district has sent me about the decision.
  • ...14 more comments...
  • Andrew Jensen on 04 Oct 12
     
    i think blocking it was 50/50, good for the kids that are addicted to changing their status, but bad for people who are on it during free time or lunch.
  • Ashtyne Madsen on 04 Oct 12
     
    I agree with Andrew because there are a lot of people that abuse he privilege, but then there are the ones that only get on when told that they can or in free time.
  • Eric Cavanaugh on 04 Oct 12
     
    I think that our school system is going way Wacko with this, with Facebook, yeah block it, but you should block it on the school's wifi not the chromes. you should be able to get on at you house. What is the harm there...? Its not like you are getting distracted from a teacher talking..... With the cell phones. Yeah, thats whatever... I understand that you aren't supposed to have them out during class, but only being aloud to have them during lunch and before or after school, it makes me feel like we are back in Jr. High, that was their policy. I even remember i went to work Kirn's show and i forgot that there was that rule and so i was walking down the hallway texting, i looked right at the teacher and said that i was in high school, she laughed and said sorry and gave it back. But i think with this rule the students will feel like that are being treated as jr high students again and i know that would make me frustrated. But not having a relaxed rule on cell phones students will just get super mad and well, teacher's and Administrators,, You're gonna have a bad time...
  • Alex Snipes on 04 Oct 12
     
    I agree with Eric, it should just be blocked on the wifi, not the Chromes themselves because now the people who brought their own computers can get on facebook, or the people with internet on their phones can access it that way. So the school didn't block the students %100, they just made an obstacle for the students to get through, because I think we all know someone is going to find a way around it soon, like they did last year.
  • Michaela Koopmeiners on 04 Oct 12
     
    I agree with Eric and Alex as well, just block it on their wifi during the school day.
  • christa bennett on 04 Oct 12
     
    It does feel like we are still in Junior High. but how do most Students? certainly not like they are in high school. If people would act their age then you could use this statement. take a look around the hallways and you know what i am talking about. And when you are on facebook or any other website it is a distraction because you are zoned out of everything that is going on around you and ten minutes can easily turn into an hour or a couple of hours
  • Rainie mccubbin on 04 Oct 12
     
    a good 3/4 of the conversations during class periods... maybe not everyone's but at least mine has been about getting around the the Facebook block. They say Facebook is distracting well it is for certain people that get on it constantly but what really is distracting is people constantly talking about how they are trying to get back on Facebook through the chromes. That's not distracting a select few it's distracting us all.
  • Jaidlyn Bookout on 04 Oct 12
     
    I feel like if the school has such a big problem with Facebook they need to realize that although blocking Facebook from chromes will stop many students from getting on it the majority of us do have smart phones. Meaning we can still get on Facebook. I think that if a student doesn't know how to control their use on facebook during school they will have to deal with the consequences and that it wasn't necessary to block the site, it's called responsibility and if someone doesn't know how to be responsible then that's their problem. Also I don't understand why students aren't able to get on Facebook outside of school?
  • Olivia Burgher on 04 Oct 12
     
    I don't feel like blocking Facebook was very beneficial. High school is supposed to be preparing us for college or a career, in which we will have access to anything we want. How are we supposed to know how to limit distractions if we don't have the opportunity to do so now? On another note, the students who aren't doing their work now with Facebook unblocked still aren't generally going to do it even without that particular distraction.
  • Eric Cavanaugh on 04 Oct 12
     
    I agree with Rainie, Jaidlyn, and Olivia. The school board and the administrators don't know what we are thinking in class, yes they might see that a good portion of our students are on Facebook, but also, a good majority is paying attention and actually learning, I personally find Facebook a good tool for school, because there has been multiple times where I have no clue what so ever on what is going on so I go and ask some of my friends that are in college and ask them, and also my friends explain it so much better than Teacher's do, I feel as though most of the times teacher's just speak it so they can get paid, they don't go in depth to it. So I feel also that if they were teaching more hands on there would be less Facebook usage, well, at least there would be if it was unblocked.
  • Eric Cavanaugh on 04 Oct 12
     
    Sorry.. I realized that I didn't finish.. With what Rainie said, that is so true you can't sit through a whole class period with out hearing, "This is peeveing me off!" or "There has to be a way around it, that will be my project this weekend, to figure out what how to get around this dumb thing!"
  • Payton Whiteaker on 09 Oct 12
     
    Personally, if the schools are trying to prepare us for the future, then why limit what we can do, and not do with the chromes? How does limiting us teach us good decision making skills? I mean, in the future, if you are at work and spend 4 hours of your time at work on facebook, you are gonna get fired. We should have it just to learn that we do not need it. Plus, students are just going to move onto the next thing. Like there are not a billion other things we are going to get on?
  • Eric Cavanaugh on 09 Oct 12
     
    I completely agree with Payton. There are so many things that aren't blocked and we can move right on to the next thing.
  • Alexis Theos on 09 Oct 12
     
    I totally agree with both Eric and Payton, also what about using our phones, Ipods, and personal computers to get on FB at school. An I know most of the people on FB use it to waste time, what about the students using it during free time for good things like making a FB page for a club or a FB event for a soccer game?
  • Bryan Pregon on 09 Oct 12
     
    In response to Payton W: If an employee would get fired for wasting company time on Facebook, what is a logical penalty for teachers/administrators to administer to those who refuse to work? It is hardly a solution to take the computer away, since there is so much effort placed on getting kids to use them for class work. Of course we cannot "fire" our students like an employee. Following your logic, shouldn't "moving on to the next thing" also get you the same penalty? Isn't the real issue students wasting time (whatever it might be)?
  • Payton Whiteaker on 10 Oct 12
     
    Mr. Pregon, the personal issue with this is, we can't go around blocking things all the time, that does not teach good choice-making skills. I know that one solution, that may only work in some situations, is that, make them do it by hand. I've seen teachers use this before, and noticed quiet a bit improvement on students taking it upon themselves to avoid facebook. Mr. Nelson, in Algebra 2 made someone solve a 3 variable question using Matrices by hand, which can take about 10 minutes for a single problem. That student has not been on facebook in his class, or at least caught, since. As for penalties, students do have privileged that teachers may take away, such as going to the bathroom during class. Although, that is unlikely to affect most students, it is hard to say whether or not that will have much affect. Perhaps a major punishment such as Monday school if caught so many times? I have no direct answer as to how this should work though.
Bryan Pregon

Swiss Company Wants Its Drugs Back - 9 views

www.wowt.com/..._Its_Drugs_Back_134709313.html

government death penalty drugs

shared by Bryan Pregon on 30 Nov 11 - No Cached
  • Ziada Karbowski on 30 Nov 11
     
    The death penalty scares me, I have watched movies where they kill people this way and it is cruel. I don't think anyone should be put to death if they are in prison for a crime I think they should do their time. They should sit and rot in prison for the rest of their life, but they are in prison for killing, etc...and then we do the same to them, I don't get it.
  • ...1 more comment...
  • broxton anderson on 01 Dec 11
     
    i feel that the death penalty should stay around as a form of punishment, but only for the most heinous of crimes. As for how we obtained this lethal drug, it is ours legally and can not be taken back. However america should start making our own lethal drugs if we want to take part in executions.
  • anonymous on 01 Dec 11
     
    I think we need stay out of overseas activities like this. It doesn't matter if we did everything legally, it's still wrong.
  • casandra morales on 01 Dec 11
     
    i dont think anyone should go on death row i think they should give them a life sentence and be kept alive that way they feel guilty later on about what they've done and little by little they'll start going crazy and eventually try suicide because they wont want to be locked up forever but the cops wont let them hurt themselves so then they'll be getting even more crazy go psycho probably.....its like self torture for them:)
Bryan Pregon

Decoding the Obamacare 'marriage penalty' - 3 views

money.cnn.com/...index.html

shared by Bryan Pregon on 07 Nov 13 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 07 Nov 13
     
    "The marriage penalty results largely from the fact that the combined salaries of couples can push them out of the range of eligibility faster than if they were unmarried and their paychecks were treated separately."
  • Ryan Camden on 07 Nov 13
     
    I think that they shouldnt do that because what if they still dont have the money
Bryan Pregon

South Carolina adds firing squad to execution methods after running out of lethal-injec... - 20 views

www.abc.net.au/...100125786

shared by Bryan Pregon on 09 May 21 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 09 May 21
     
    "Politicians in South Carolina have voted to add a firing squad to the state's execution methods amid a lack of lethal-injection drugs"
  • ...16 more comments...
  • sydneykolln on 10 May 21
     
    South Carolina has the electric chair and now a firing squad as their execution methods. It's absurd that the firing squad passed and that South Carolina is now the fourth state to allow this. Personally, I don't believe that there should be any execution methods and this just seems completely crazy to me that a firing squad is now one.
  • arosas733 on 10 May 21
     
    I find it kind of funny they would use a firing squad. It is a waste of money and a lot more extra work and time spent on worthless people. I believe executions for those kinds of people should be quick, easy, and cheap. Firing squads just seem ridiculous especially since it's not like they are being attacked and need to use multiple people for one person.
  • nick_rice on 10 May 21
     
    I don't understand why they would choose a firing squad of all things. I feel like there are more humane ways to execute someone but I suppose some people may want to go out with a bang.
  • allisonwalker on 10 May 21
     
    I don't understand why this is even a thing. No one should be sentenced to death and if they were sentenced to death, it should be a humane way, not a firing squad or electric chair.
  • kredding147 on 10 May 21
     
    This is just stupid. This would be such a painful and awful way to go, even if you did something bad enough to get sentenced to death. Imagine what these people's families would be thinking, watching their son or daughter getting shot to death.
  • joeypo10 on 10 May 21
     
    I don't understand why South Carolina thinks this should be aloud. Granted the death would happen anyway but having people line up and shoot people just seems inhumane and unnecessary.
  • peytongrenoble on 10 May 21
     
    I personally don't understand how they came to the decision that this was smart or found a way to justify it. I don't think that it is something that is going to be used in other states...hopefully. I think that this should be intervened by the national government considering how inhumane the idea is.
  • samhovey on 10 May 21
     
    I agree with Joey, this seems like a recreational activity that fire squads would enjoy participating in, rather than an act of justice.
  • eballenger on 10 May 21
     
    I think this is a pretty cruel punishment even for large criminals and seems like its more for the firing squad than it is about justice.
  • milo_nordman on 11 May 21
     
    Having a firing squad as an execution method is ridiculous. It's a cruel and inhumane punishment that shouldn't be used, and the fact that four states have it listed as an execution method is disturbing.
  • ericschmidtberge on 11 May 21
     
    I think that there should be a death penalty in cases where the criminal is too dangerous to be kept in captivity but a firing squad is an insane method. Not only is it a waste of money, time, and effort but do they really need a full firing squad for one person? That just makes no sense and seems nothing but cruel and disturbing.
  • mcaamal on 13 May 21
     
    I disagree with this they should not be adding new way of execution. This a cruel way to punish people and it should not be allowed. There are other way to punish people other than getting violent.
  • abbidominguez on 14 May 21
     
    I think a firing squad is very extreme. I think the death penalty in general is very extreme. I can't believe South Carolina is the 4th state to allow this as well. There are definitely other ways to go about this than a firing squad or a death penalty at all.
  • masonmascarenas on 17 May 21
     
    I don't believe as we are such an advanced society that we should resort back to such a harsh capital punishment.
  • jdogan on 17 May 21
     
    I can't see a death sentence not being a cruel punishment let alone the electric chair as the method, but South Carolina seeking to go further by adding the firing squad is even worse the fact that anyone would be convinced this is acceptable is astounding to me and shows the disconnect people have from the people around them
  • redrose99875 on 17 May 21
     
    I really hope they get more injections, so the executions can be more humane again
  • tsilva588 on 17 May 21
     
    Honestly, lethal injection isn't any better they still suffer even with that method so I don't really see a problem with this because they will be killed either way.
  • thomaschau on 21 May 21
     
    I think a firing squad is a more humane death than lethal injection. Trained men with rifles and a well-placed shot to the head are the swiftest way to go.
jwondercheck947

Obamacare Sign-Ups Could Get A Bump As Higher Penalties Kick In - 2 views

www.npr.org/...mp-as-higher-penalties-kick-in

shared by jwondercheck947 on 15 Dec 15 - No Cached
  • jwondercheck947 on 15 Dec 15
     
    Tuesday is the last day to choose a health plan under the Affordable Care Act if you want insurance coverage to begin by Jan. 1. And officials who have spent the last two years using the carrot of persuasion to get people to buy insurance through the state or federal exchanges say the time has come for the stick.
Bryan Pregon

HB 481: Georgia law criminalizes abortion, subjects women to life in prison. - 0 views

slate.com/...s-women-to-life-in-prison.html

shared by Bryan Pregon on 09 May 19 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 09 May 19
     
    "On Tuesday, Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a "fetal heartbeat" bill that seeks to outlaw abortion after about six weeks. The measure, HB 481, is the most extreme abortion ban in the country-not just because it would impose severe limitations on women's reproductive rights, but also because it would subject women who get illegal abortions to life imprisonment and the death penalty."
Bryan Pregon

Alabama death row inmate Vernon Madison gets reprieve - CNN - 5 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

shared by Bryan Pregon on 26 Jan 18 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 26 Jan 18
     
    "Given Alabama's rejection of judicial override, the death sentence in this case constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and violates Mr. Madison's rights to a jury, fair and reliable sentencing and to due process and equal protection of the laws as guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and Alabama law," they wrote in their petition."
  • kegner573 on 30 Jan 18
     
    I understand that Madison has become mentally ill and doesn't have memory of the crime he committed, but he still committed the crime and was sentenced to the death penalty at first. However, due to an Alabama law no longer allowing the death penalty I think life without parole would be a good alternative for him.
  • mborgaila831 on 30 Jan 18
     
    "Mr. Madison suffers from vascular dementia as a result of multiple serious strokes in the last several years, and no longer has a memory of the commission of the crime for which he is to be executed," How does this make the crimes he has committed go away?
carsonschaa

Virginia move to abolish death penalty part of broader wave of change - CSMonitor.com - 2 views

I think death penalty shouldn't be a round anymore but however I think it should be only used if you killed another person on purpose or multiple people.

started by carsonschaa on 15 Mar 21 no follow-up yet
carsonschaa

Virginia move to abolish death penalty part of broader wave of change - CSMonitor.com - 1 views

I think death penalty shouldn't be a round anymore but however I think it should be only used if you killed another person on purpose or multiple people.

started by carsonschaa on 15 Mar 21 no follow-up yet
Suzanne Peterson

Nationwide ban on use of cell phone while driving - 3 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

shared by Suzanne Peterson on 13 Dec 11 - No Cached
  • Alexis Daniels on 16 Dec 11
     
    thats not going to work people are going to use their cells no matter what
  • Derek Large on 16 Dec 11
     
    People will always use their cellphones but they need the "encouragement" to stop while they are driving. maybe if the penalty is high enough then things will change...
Bryan Pregon

"I can't breathe!" N.Y. chokehold decision - CNN.com - 24 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

shared by Bryan Pregon on 04 Dec 14 - No Cached
  • Bryan Pregon on 04 Dec 14
     
    Recent cases like these bring up issues of POWER and govt authority. Are these examples concerning? Which side (police/suspect) do you tend to sympathize with most?
  • ...14 more comments...
  • taylorcrinklaw13 on 04 Dec 14
     
    I don't think it's concerning. The government is there for a reason, and they need power to do their jobs. I tend to sympathize with cops because it only shows the bad police that are in the system, a video of an officer doing something good rarely goes viral.
  • chrislindqvist on 04 Dec 14
     
    I sympathize with the cop. He is here to protect us from people that can cause bad things, Michael Brown actually attacked him and the cop did what he had to do to survive. You have to show respect to cops and he didn't do only because he was black or that he wanted to kill someone, he did it becuase the felt threaten for his life
  • Mia Wheeler on 04 Dec 14
     
    I usually don't see death as an answer to anything unless that person is causing harm to other people. I don't think the officer should have actually killed him but instead used a different method to getting him to do what he wanted him to do.
  • Erin Wolff on 04 Dec 14
     
    I think these examples are very concerning. I sympathize with the suspect, Eric Garner, after watching the short 2 minute clip of the incident. The suspect was unarmed, and was only verbally refusing arrest, there is no probable cause for putting the suspect in a choke hold, and very well killing him. The grand jury that decided that officer, Daniel Pantaleo, did the right thing started peaceful protest in the Garner family. This is like the case in Ferguson, Missouri, except these protest do not include, looting, setting businesses on fire, or tear gas.
  • aharding484 on 04 Dec 14
     
    I think there could have been a better way to control the situation other than a choke hold. It would be understandable if it was for a few seconds to calm Garner down, but the police should have known when to stop. He should have been charged for excessive force.
  • jgroenjes on 04 Dec 14
     
    I strongly sympathize with Eric Garner and his family in this case. Police are stepping over the line in instances like these, and no penalties are given to them. The fact that death is necessary for the resistance of a single unarmed citizen is horrific. Resisting arrest or not resisting arrest, if there is no threat of fatal harm to the police officer, no arrest should ever resort to murder.
  • fwyldes753 on 05 Dec 14
     
    I understand that the police thought they had to stop him, but putting him in a choke hold was not the right way. They are going to far with the power they think they have.
  • jjohnson749 on 08 Dec 14
     
    i didn't see any reason why the officer put Eric Garner in a choke hold for what he did, the officer was abusing his power, a choke hold was not the right answer.
  • austin807 on 09 Dec 14
     
    They are going to far with the power they think they have, a choke hold was not right way to go
  • samanthaahern on 09 Dec 14
     
    yes especially the part when the officer put eric in the choke. the officer thinks he can do whatever he wants just cause hes a cop and had some power of us but he took it to far
  • darianhubbard on 09 Dec 14
     
    There were better methods of restraint to get Eric Garner into handcuffs. A choke hold was definitely not necessary, and the cop was definitely abusing his power. No attempted arrest should end in the death of someone, cop or citizen.
  • bdiaz971 on 09 Dec 14
     
    The cop has a right to detain anyone that is breaking the law, but he should not have put him in a choke hold. He has numerous tools capable of detaining someone such as; handcuffs, pepper spray, and a taser.
  • kschwindt on 09 Dec 14
     
    I don't believe that anyone should have any chances of death when being put in handcuffs, but I also don't know the full story of the incidents of the victims, maybe they weren't cooperating and the cops felt that the only way to control them was the chokehold. I believe that the cops should find another way to hold down their victims when handcuffing
  • escheffler on 10 Dec 14
     
    I think that this case is similar to the Ferguson case which could cause more people to start protesting more and even worse then they already are. Things could get really bad if it ever happened again.
  • djones036 on 10 Dec 14
     
    The cop has a right to detain anyone that is breaking the law, but he should not have put him in a choke hold. He has numerous tools he could of used while detaining someone like his taser, handcuffs, or pepper spray.
  • brooklynschroede on 12 Dec 14
     
    The cop has no reason to put him in a choke hold and for so long. The guy was saying he couldn't breathe. This is very wrong and he could of detained him a few other ways.
guillermosolorio

'Road Rage' Tragity 4-year-old shot dead as police hunt gunman - 8 views

its really sad what happened but they have no real evidence

news

started by Renee Borgaila on 21 Oct 15 6 follow-ups, last by guillermosolorio on 21 Oct 15
qanderson136

A heavily fortified Minneapolis awaits verdict in Chauvin trial - POLITICO - 14 views

www.politico.com/...s-verdict-chauvin-trial-483043

shared by qanderson136 on 19 Apr 21 - No Cached
  • qanderson136 on 19 Apr 21
     
    Thoughts?
  • ...9 more comments...
  • masonmascarenas on 19 Apr 21
     
    Both side are going to pull their own narritive for who or what killed George Floyd however it is weird to see how the defense of the office pulled in the racial difference between the two.
  • noahsandbothe on 27 Apr 21
     
    Justice has been served in this case but if there was true justice George Floyd would still be alive. This is a good step but it's not nearly enough.
  • saraivargas on 03 May 21
     
    I don't think we should celebrate the bare minimum of putting away a murderer. While he is locked up, there are so many other's out there spreading the same harm and sharing the same narrative towards their fellow comrades. So many officers get away with a plethora of crimes, and some just stand by and watch. There can't be any"good ones" if they stand by and watch it happen without saying a word when they have the power to do so.
  • jackiegonzalez on 03 May 21
     
    I agree with Sarai. There is so much racism that takes place in the police force, the death penalty, the government, and our overall society. People have fought against racism for decades. And winning one case, while it may be a starting point, is not something to celebrate when people of color have struggled so much.
  • nick_rice on 03 May 21
     
    I think it is good that we locked him up but I also think we need to do more about this kind of stuff. This stuff seems to happen often and something needs to be done about it.
  • allisonwalker on 03 May 21
     
    Something needs to be done, so something like this doesn't happen and more lives can be kept.
  • jdogan on 05 May 21
     
    The fact that a guilty verdict for Chauvin was even a surprise is a very bad thing it's good that there's finally some progress though.
  • carsonschaa on 10 May 21
     
    It seems like no one tried to help him, but that's what I'm thinking about from reading this passage.
  • peytongrenoble on 10 May 21
     
    I personally don't understand how people thought he would be not guilty. There is so much evidence proving him guilty, yet many were still shocked. My primary issue with the case is how it took someone to be killed for light to be shed on racism. There isn't complete justice, but we are getting pushed in the right direction.
  • tsilva588 on 10 May 21
     
    It's obvious that this man needed to be punished for his actions and no one should be shocked. Watching the video of George Floyds last few minutes was awkward and seemed inhuman and could have easily had been stopped regardless of the struggle he was giving or the drugs he was on, that officer killed him. He spent the last few minutes of a precious life begging for mercy and that was it. So Chauvin is getting the treatment anyone else would get.
  • arosas733 on 24 May 21
     
    It is crazy how some people do not see Chauvin in the wrong. This was complete discrimination against him and this should not have happened. Punishments are necessary for him and he took a life from a family that could never be given back or forgiven, when he could've handled the situation in a more fair, civil way.
1 - 19 of 19
Showing 20▼ items per page