Wednesday, May 6, 2015

Police brutality

I'm sure that you have been hearing about the whole "police brutality" around the country with the shootings of Freddy Gray, Michael Brown, and Trayvon Martin that soon later turned violent, and then blaming the police for their brutality. In this speech, I'm going to tell you more about the history and what is going on about "police brutality" and how people are taking it.


Police brutality is defined as wanton use of excessive force usually physical but also common informs of verbal attacks and psychological intimidation by a police officer. Police brutality doesn't just exist in our country, but around the world also. Police misconduct includes false arrest, intimidation, racial profiling, political repression, surveillance abuse, sexual abuse, and police corruption.


The history of police brutality ages way back to the Civil Rights Movement and the Southern Slave Trade. Brutality has a certain perception that victims of police brutality has often belong to and they are mainly powerless groups such as minorities, the disabled, the young, and the poor. The word "brutality" has several meanings, but towards civilians it's mainly used in savage cruelty.The term "police brutality" started being used in the American press in 1872 when the Chicago Tribune reported a beating on a civilian under arrest at the Harrison Street Police Station. In 1991 in Los Angeles, California police officers harshly beat an African American man, Rodney King and his two passengers while a civilian taped the incident leading to extensive media coverage and criminal charges against the several officers that were involved. Shortly leading after this incident caused the Los Angeles riots in 1992. According to the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles riots caused 53 deaths, 2,383 injuries, more than 7,000 fires, damaged 3,100 businesses, and nearly lost 1 billion in financial losses. Two out of the four officers were convicted and received a 32 month sentence for being blamed for this chaos. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2011 stating that between the years of 2003-2009, 4,813 people died in the process of being arrested by local police and 2,876 of the deaths were people of color.


When Hubert Locke experienced and saw the police brutality that they force to relatively powerless groups he said this, "When used in print or as the battle cry in a black power rally, police brutality can by implication cover a number of practices, from calling a citizen by his or her first name to a death by a policeman's bullet. What the average citizen thinks of when he hears the term, however, is something midway between these two occurrences, something more akin to what the police profession knows as the "alley court"- the wanton vicious beating of a person in custody, usually while handcuffed, and usually taking place somewhere between the scene of the arrest and the station house."


The history in the United States goes way back to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's, Anti-War Demonstrations, and Global War on Terrorism. In 2014 the UN Committee against torture condemned police brutality and excessive use of force by law enforcement in the United States. The UN states, "frequent and recurrent police shootings or fatal pursuits of unarmed black individuals."


The causes vary among people, the towns they live in, and the way they were brought up, but police brutality happens anywhere and it doesn't matter about any of those reasons. A police officer are legally permitted to use special force, and everyone expects to use the force that they are permitted. The problem is with police officers is that they gradually develop an attitude or sense of authority over society, which creates violence with citizens. It's also some of their personality traits that make some officers more susceptible to use their force that they are provided towards others. These personality traits relates to previous traumatic job-related experience and then also the category where they are young and inexperienced. Violence can be used by police and be excessive despite being unlawful, which can make the police react and be considered police brutality. Sometimes police brutality is often used to refer to violence used by each individual police officer to achieve politically desirable ends, but the studies show that there are officers who believe the legal system they serve is failing and it is their duty to pick up the slack. It's also known as "vigilantism" which is where the officer involved may think that the suspect deserves more punishment that what they may have to serve under the court system, which creates police brutality.


It is measured based off the account of people who have experienced or seen it as well as the juries who are present for trials involving police brutality cases. Because there is no way to quantify the use of excessive force for any particular situation, it all depends on if the suspected person or persons is or are restricting police force. But police force cannot be quantified but it is the opinion of brutality among various races, genders, and age. Black females, and younger people are more likely to have a negative opinions about police than white, males, middle-aged to elderly individuals.


Police brutality is known as the abuse of power because they are expected to protect the public and confront potentially violent individuals they are able to legally use physical even deadly force under certain circumstances. An officer who uses force when it is not called for or who uses more force than is necessary to perform their job may cross the line into police brutality.


The constitutional implications is the one that effects societies the most. Police officers are agents of the government which means they have the ability to do anything. While a citizen who is subjected to police brutality may be able to sue the police officer or even the department for personal damages under law but as people claim, many cases of police brutality involve civil rights violations. In this situation violations is among the constitutional claims as a victims brutality may raise and these reasons might be denial of the due process rights guaranteed by the 4th and 14th amendment of the constitution, unreasonable searches prohibited by the 4th amendment, and the violation of the civil rights under the civil rights act of 1871. Another factor is constitutional implications where race is a main factor due to police brutality. If a police officer brutalizes a person based on a persons race a victim may also raise a claim of violation of his right to equal protection under the law.


Police brutality conflicts with community damage, both bad and good. It can destroy neighborhoods, but can also bring them closer. Harm inflicted by police officers who engage and engage in brutality is the loss of brutality is the loss of trust by members of the community they have sworn to protect. In able to have police officers succeed in their job they need trust in the community around them. When a officer doesn't have any trust from the communities around them, witnesses and victims are less likely to report a crime or cooroperate in investigations if the cops have betrayed their trust by brutalizing their neighbors, family members, and friends.


One story that I came across was the story of Frank Jude. Frank Jude was a 24-year old man who was viciously beat by several off-duty Milwaukee police officers as he was leaving a party. The police attacked Frank and his friends because one of the officers claimed that Frank's friend stole his wallet which contained a police badge. His friend was cut in the face with a knife but was able to get away unlike Frank who was repeatedly punched and kicked and then later stabbed in both ears with a pen. Later, the three officers were sent to court and charged.


Then there's the most recent one of Freddy Gray in Baltimore, Maryland where a man died from spinal injury due to police brutality. They say that the police hid the main part of the injury so that no video would catch them, which made him soon later die. When it went viral and people started going out for riots, it was the police vs. black men. The main reason why he was arrested is because they thought that he was being suspicious because Freddy made eye contact with one of them, then soon after started running. He was found with a knife on him, but it wasn't used to create the crime.


Police brutality has progressed in the years but the 21st century it has gotten worse. Many police brutality happens all over the countries, but mainly in bigger cities where the blacks outnumber the whites. It sounds bad enough as it is just hearing it on the news, but when someone's loved one is killed, they think that nothing else bad can happen. In my opinion, police brutality can lower the causes of people's death in the United States and it would make the world a better place.




Tuesday, May 5, 2015

Websites and articles - police brutality

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/14/22293714-what-is-police-brutality-depends-on-where-you-live

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/police-brutality.html

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_brutality

http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/police-brutality-lawsuits-cities-20150504

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/14/22293714-what-is-police-brutality-depends-on-where-you-live

http://chicago.suntimes.com/mary-mitchell/7/71/576905/black-black-violence-bad-police-brutality

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/30/us/baltimore-freddie-gray-death-investigation/

http://www.colorlines.com/articles/what-obama-says-hell-do-about-police-brutality

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-mysterious-death-of-freddie-gray/391119/

Thursday, April 23, 2015

Ted talk video

http://youtu.be/KM4Xe6Dlp0Y


In this Ted talk, Cameron talked about how beauty isn't just about the looks, but being a model is a choice. In the beginning of the speech, she changed her clothes. At first she was wearing a tight dress with heels on but then she changed into an old fashioned outfit, long skirt, a sweater, and flat casual shoes. She did this because towards the end of the talk, she talks about how she wasn't pretty. Throughout the talk she talked about how she was talked into modeling and such. But then after she showed all of her pictures she got asked if the pictures were edited. After that question, she showed all of her pictures that we taken the same day of the photo that was taken during the shot, and you could tell that they were edited because of how much different she looked. In each photo she looks twice her age, especially when she first started modeling. This Ted talk inspired me the most because somewhere in the speech she said that the women who model, are insecure about themselves and she said that no one should ever be insecure about themselves.

Tuesday, April 21, 2015

blog #9

On both debates my team had good points, and the points that each of us created a good argument with the other team. The first debate was our first one debating against something that wasn't a big conflict towards most the people in the United States, but it was still an argument for the young teens about violence in video games. In that argument we had good points, but we did make a valid point to what we wanted to argue exactly because our points had good information, but not really experiencing the fact of video games (me) it was kind of hard to argue about. The second debate, I also had the same situation, I did not have any experience with the topic, but my partner did coming from a 18 age limit drinking age. During that debate we did better because of the advice that was given after the first debate. We had stories and more valid point that we could relate to the real world today.

In the first debate I was nervous because I didn't really know what I was exactly talking about because I have never played violent video games and I didn't know what they were all about, but I was all for that violence in video games need to stop because of what happened in the world today, so I was able to argue a little bit, but I didn't have valid points that proved our point. During the second debate, I was much confident even though I was on the side of keeping the drinking age at 21. I was more confident because I knew what to do, what to look up, how to argue against them, and more.

The other team was majority over us because they had three people and we had two. During each debate they had valid points that we were able to argue against, which was good. And also there closing and beginning statement were very detailed in life today and also facts that were valid enough so we could relate back to them.

In my opinion each debate was even, but the first one the other group won it and the second one we won it. The first group won it because they acted more confident in what they were saying, and had valid points that were hard to argue back to because it's either you didn't find anything that was against it, or you couldn't because you knew that it was true. In the second argument, we won it because we had valid points, and when we made them it was hard for them to argue back. And we could relate more to the drinking age being set at 18 years old.

Friday, April 17, 2015

Pros: Lowering drinking age to 18


Lowering the drinking age in the United States to 18 has always been a conflict. Before 1987 the drinking age was 18, which did not change anything. The crashes that have been reported were between the age of 21-24 years old, which has nothing to do with changing the drinking age and lowering it down to 18 years old. Lowering the drinking age wouldn't be a controversial thing because most of the countries around the world has their drinking age set at age 18, and none of them have changed it due to the possible things that would happen including more crashes, alcohol poisening, and none responsible teenagers that would be drinking and driving or providing it to younger kids. But also, 29 states in the United States allow underage drinking as long as it occurs on private premises and is done with parental permission. And half the states allows underage drinking if it is for religious purposes. And then another 11 states allows underage drinking if it is for educational purposes. Making the drinking age 21 years old, young people are still drinking even though its illegal. The fear of being caught creates converts drinking such as secretive drinking and that makes it hard for parents and adults because they don't know what's happening and if they have a problem to help them out. "Pre-gaming" is another big issue. When teenagers go out and they are not allowed to drink because they are under age, they do such thing as pre-gaming which is drinking alcohol in short period of time, which can cause alcohol poisoning which can lead into many bad things including death based on how bad it is. When your under the age of 18, you tend to drink more because you don't know when's the next time you'll be able to drink again. You might say that tolerance comes with age, but in reality it does not, it comes with realization and responsibility. If 18 year olds are able to vote, get married, and go to war, why can't the drinking age be lowered to 18 years old?




- Many states already allowed underage drinking to occur
   - In 29 states in the U.S, drinking is allowed at the age of 18 as long as it, occurs on private premises and is done with parental permission 
   - 50% of the U.S allows for underage alcohol consumption if it is done for a religious purpose 
   - Another 11 states allow underage drinking if it is for educational purposes 
- Traffic accidents and fatalities due to drinking come from new drinkers of any age
   - 2009 dats, the age group with the highest percent of drivers with an illegal blood alcohol content level was the 21-24 age demographic
   - Although there would be increases in the 18-20 age group in these statistics these would be offset by reductions in older age groups
- No evidence that a 21 year old drinking age reduces accidents 
   - When the legal age of drinking was set in 1984, the rate of traffic fatalities/accidents decreased less in the U.S


- An 18 year old has the right to vote and serve in the military
   - If an 18 year old can make up their mind of who's going to be the next leader and take a bullet for their country they should be able to buy alcohol. 
- Says that 18 year olds has less tolerance compared to a 21 year old 
   - MIGHT be true- but you won't know until you find out
   - Tolerance doesn't come with age- comes with relization of responsibility 
- "Forbidden Fruit" 
   - Curiosity leads to more people under the age of 21 drinking anyways
   - 18+ "forbidden fruit" not used anymore
- People under the age of 21 tend to drink more when they get alcohol because of the uncertainty as to when they will be able to drink again
- 22% of all students under 21 compared to 18 over 21 years are healthy drinkers
   - 32% underage are compared to 24% of legal are heavy drinkers



- Young peopale are still drinking despite the fact that this behavior is illegal; teens and many adults are ignoring the law
- The law and fear of being caught creates convert drinking, such as secretive drinking makes it difficult for adults to know what's happening and help those with a problem
- The fear of being caught, limits on the ability to get alcohol 
   - Not able to drink at a club or party ables to have teens drinking large amounts in a short period of time in private (pre-gaming)
   - Putting kids at risk for alcohol poisening 
- If youth are allowed to make other choices (voting, going to war, getting married) they should be able to consume alcohol and they can face the consequences 

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Pros - video games are good!


Pros- violent video games are good!

       Playing violent video games boosts children's learning, health, and learning skills according to American Psycoholgist research. According to Isabella Granic, PhD at Radbound University says that "important research has already been conducted for decades on the negative effects of gaming, including addiction, depression, and aggression, and we are certainly not suggesting that this should be ignored...however, to understand the impact of video games on children's and adolescents' development, a more balanced perspective is needed." Playing video games may strengthen a range of cognitive skills such as navigation, reasoning, memory and perception skills. A 2013 meta-analysis found that playing video games improved a players capacity to think about objects in three dimensions just as well as academic courses designed to enhance these same skills. Also playing video games may also help children develop problem solving skills. The more adolescents reported playing strategic videos games, such as role-playing games, the more they improved in problem solving and school grades the following year according to a long-term study published in 2013. When playing video games, the youth allows themselves to learn about the possible consequences of their harmful actions. Since the kids are able to see the results of particular violence with their enemies in the game, they would think that it should not be done in real life. It also teaches them how to accept defeat especially when they loose to someone better than them in a game.


Facts:
- The authors of angry birds also highlighted the possibility that video games are effective tools for learning resilience in the face of failure
- By learning to cope with ongoing failures in games, the authors suggest that children build emotional resilience they can also rely upon their everyday lives
- Multiplayer games become viral social communities where decisions need to be made quickly about whom to trust or reject and how to lead a group
- People who play video games even if they are violent that encourage cooperation that are more likely to be helpful to others while gaming than those who play the same games competitively a 2011 study found

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/02/video-game.aspx


-Helps in expressing aggression and establishing their peer group
- Able to release whatever aggression they have through a game
- Allows themselves to learn about the possible consequences of their harmful actions; since the kids are able to see the results of particular violence with their enemies in the game, they would likely think that it should not be done in real life
- Learns how to accept defeat especially when they lost to someone better than them in the game

http://healthresearchfunding.org/video-game-violence-pros-cons/

- Video games are therapeutic for children with chronic illness
   - University of Utah released a study that examined the effects of regular gaming on children diagnosed with illnesses like autism, depression, and Parkinson's disease
   - Kids who play certain games shows signs of improvement in many fields
   - Researchers believed the games' ability to act on neuronal mechanisms that activate positive emotions and the reward system and that helped improve kids' demeanors as they faced the daily challenges of their illness
- Video games reduce stress and depression
   - 2009's Annual Review of Cybertherapy and Telemedince included a study that found that gamers who suffered from mental health issues such as stress and depression were able to vent their frustration and aggression by playing video games
   - Hypothesized that games give a certain "type A" personalities
   - Time to relax in "a state of relative mindlessness"
- Video games provide pain relief
  - Not only provides relief from emotional pain but also physical pain
  - Psychologists at University of Washington developed a game that helps hospital patients suffering from immense physical pain by using an age-old trick; distraction
- Video games improve your decision-making skills
   - Most video games require fast reaction and slip-second decisions that can mean the difference between virtual life and virtual death
   - Cognitive neuroscientists at the University of Rochester in New York found that these games give players' brains plenty of practice for making decisions in the real world

http://theweek.com/articles/466852/7-health-benefits-playing-video-games