Revised Blog

Why are so many people uncomfortable with the idea that many problems don’t have a single solution? Give an example of a current controversy in which there are different factions arguing that theirs is the one right answer and explain why there is in reality no one right answer to the issue.

Gun Control

Many issues exist in today’s society that have multiple solutions to them.  This results in no one single solution being able to solve all issues that come about.  We have never lived in a society in which everyone has been able to be on the same page when problems arise. No matter what issue people may stumble upon; there will always be pros and cons that exist on both sides. The good, and the bad for say. This leads people to be uncomfortable with the idea that there is no single solution to any one particular issue. Their views are always on the opposing side. If a person has their mind already made up, it’s almost impossible to change it otherwise. People believe in this manner due to their beliefs, values, and the act of primacy. Whatever a person has chosen to believe, they are going to hold their values strongly to that belief.  At the same time their first experience to their beliefs are going to have an unshakeable impression on them; the act of primacy. This is precisely what leads people to believing that their solution to any particular matter is the only right way to address the issue.

Gun control is a major controversy issue in today’s society that has no one single solution to please all sides of the problem. When discussing the topic of gun control, there are actually three sides to the issue; those who are for guns, those who are antigun, and those who are neutral. I will be placing a special emphasis on people whom are pro-gun and people whom are antigun.

 People who are for guns do not understand why anyone would be against them. They have in fact helped win numerous battles in which has insured we as Americans have been able to keep our freedoms. Guns are great in the fact they are a major tool used in self-defense. In fact, 67% of guns owners have guns for that very reason. http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp  Whether that type of self-defense be at home or abroad, people whom are for guns are only looking at the good that they do for people. They are not taking into consideration any other aspects of the issue.

People whom are against guns only look at the negative implications that arise because of them. The fact of the matter is that guns are used in violent crimes every day. Its’ almost impossible to turn on the news and not see a gun used in some type of crime.  Antigun enthusiasts have a bias opinion on this issue for this very reason. When they see so many people being either killed or seriously injured by guns, they cannot fathom why anyone would want to keep them around. They are only looking at the harmful effects caused by them. They are not considering the good that they do for our society. In their minds the only solution to the problem is to ban guns altogether.

People whom are neural on gun control don’t contribute to the issue. In their minds guns are just part of our society. They know that they exist, but they don’t have an opinion on the topic. This group of people could care less if guns remain in our society, or if they are banned altogether. They know there is controversy regarding the issue, but they chose to remain neutral because of the controversy.

The controversy over gun control will always exist in our society. Both sides of the issue are extremist.  One group wants to ban guns altogether, while the other side wants to keep guns around forever. The only possible solution to the issue is to implement regulations on preventing certain types of individuals from obtaining ownership of guns. http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/firearm-laws Even with regulations places on owning guns, the controversy over the issue still exist. Passing laws restricting ownership of guns makes people whom are pro-gun furious. At the same time, these laws are not good enough for people whom are antigun. No matter if guns were to be banned, kept around, or just restrictions places on them, controversy will still exist. Both sides to the issue will always believe that their solution will be the right one.     

Technology and Critical Thinking

Technology has come a long way in the last thirty years. It has enhanced our ability to communicate instantly with anyone in the world at a moments notice. Even though technology has helped improve our critical thinking skills, it still has some minor drawbacks. With the invention of television and the internet, people have become more dependent on being told about ideas rather then researching and reading on their own. This has led to a rather lazy society in that sense; nonetheless, this new technology has not replaced people’s ability to read and critically think. In fact new technology has done exactly the opposite.

People’s ability to comprehend complex concepts has improved dramatically in the past thirty years through the use of the internet. With this advancement of new technology, schools have also become more advanced. At one time a person’s chances of going to school after graduating high school were slim to none. If a person’s family were not wealthy, that individual would have to go straight into the work force, accepting a low paying job that did not require any critical thinking skills just to support him/herself. Now that same type of individual can still work and go to school simultaneously to earn a degree online. Having more financial aid available today definitely helps the process, but the fact still remains that a person can go to school online while having a full time job without using any other assistance. This concept has lead to a greater portion of the population becoming more educated. Critical thinking goes hand in hand with increased education. At the same time, people are also increasing their reading skills. Earning a degree online requires substantial reading in order to complete the program. Some might say online degrees are not as creditable as a degree eared from a traditional school. Research has shown otherwise; there is no significance difference that has been discovered between distance learning and traditional classroom achievements. (http://onlineeducationinformation.org/choosing-a-credible-online-degree)

Television has also led to people’s ability to become better critical thinks. With this advancement the population has been exposed to new ideas and concepts that they would otherwise not have been able to explore. Some might argue that television is only comprised of rubbish. These people are not completely wrong with their notion. Most television shows consist of made up stories and ideas that are useless. The type of television programs that help people develop their critical thinking skills are factual shows. (http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/resources/educational/teaching_backgrounders/media_literacy/aspects_critical_thinking_1.cfm) Programs on the discovery, history, and military channel make people really think about new ideas and concepts. When people watch these types of programs they are using their cognitive thinking skills. This technology is precisely what has led to a greater portion of the population becoming better critical thinkers. Certain gaming television shows have helped people with their reading skills as well. This concept is to a much leaser degree through. The reading portions are short; nevertheless, people are still reading while they are watching TV.

Our society would not let any type of authority burn books. Even though everyone doesn’t enjoy reading all of the time, most people know reading books provide a great way to gain knowledge. Without books people would have limited ways of introducing new ides for future developments to others. Our society would be stuck in a rut, which probably would lead to chaos. The public is by far too educated to ever allow this to happen. People are aware of the bad implementations that would follow if authorities were allowed to burn books for the so called greater good.

Gun Control

 Why are so many people uncomfortable with the idea that many problems don’t have a single solution? Give an example of a current controversy is which there are different factions arguing that theirs is the one right answer and explain why there is in reality no one right answer to the issue.

Since the invention of black powder, guns have been part of our society. Their main purpose is to defend people or their countries from being invaded by others. Guns are one of the major contributing factors that have helped win wars in our past history, providing us with the freedom most people take for granite. Just as technology has advanced through the years, so have firearms. This advancement has brought negative implementations though. Throughout the history of firearms, criminals have taken full advantage of using these weapons in their criminal activities. So the big question arises, should all people be banned from owning firearms?  The answer to this question is obvious. No, law-biding citizens are the ones that should be allowed to own firearms. Owning firearms is an absolute right that our forefathers gave to us long ago. If firearms were taken away from all citizens in their entirety, our society would be in great danger. Not everyone should be able to own firearms through. Regulations need to be placed on owing these weapons, which leads us to the hardest question, how should guns be regulated?

Many regulations have already been placed on purchasing and owing firearms. For example; a person has to be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle, 21 years of age to purchase a handgun, anyone convicted of a felony, dishonorably discharged from the armed forces, unlawful users of certain narcotics, people convinced of a misdemeanor of domestic violence, and anyone that has given up their rights to be an American Citizen are not allowed to purchase or own firearms. (http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/firearm-laws) This list continues to go on with several other restrictions. I list these particular restrictions because they outline the different types of people we do not want to own firearms. The type of people I’m taking about are criminals, the exact type of citizens that should not have any rights whatsoever to firearms. Even with all these restrictions, there are still groups that would like to see firearms banned from our society in their entirety. There is absolutely no way possible to take firearms away from every citizen in America, nor should their be. The idea of banning firearms becomes an extremely controversial issue amongst people because there is no single solution to satisfy both parties. Certain groups want to see guns banned, while others such as the National Rifle Association want people to continue to have the right to bear arms. With the many restrictions already placed on owning and purchasing firearms, a rational person would think the problem has been address appropriately.

The main reason law-biding citizens should continue to have to right to own firearms is self-defense. You hear about people defending themselves and their families all the time in the news from criminals breaking into their homes. If these homeowners were not armed, the happy ending stories would not be the same. Statistics have shown countries that have outlawed home-defense weapons have higher home invasions. (http://www.a-human-right.com/homedefense.html) If firearms were to be are outlawed, criminals would no longer have that element of threat against them. In a free country like America, criminals have no way of knowing if homeowners are armed. That psychological element of threat plays a major role in deterring criminals from burglarizing people. 

One might argue that people who own firearms are putting their children at risk. First of all, gun owners need to be responsible on how they store their weapons. This responsibility completely falls on the owner. If a child were to get a hold of a weapon, and that child causes bodily harm to themselves or another, the adult should be held accountable. But realistically this type of sanerio actually is a rare occurrence. According to the National Safety Council, the leading cause of accidental deaths in the US is medial errors. (http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/deaths_by_firearm.htm) People by far have a greater chance of being accidentally killed by a doctor misreading a medial chart than from an accidental discharge from a firearm.  

Hunting, target practice, and competitive shooting are more reasons law-biding citizens should continue to have the right to bear arms. Yes, accidents can and do happen during these events, but rarely occur. Athletic sports on the other hand cause major life alternating injuries quite regularly. You don’t see groups out there trying to ban these types of sports just because someone gets hurt. The public has come to accept that accidents are bound to occur playing sports. The same could be said for hunting, target practice, and competitive shooting. Shooting accidents just seem more dramatic because of the degree of injury involved with someone being shot.

Guns are not the primary cause of accidents in America. They can be extremely dangerous if they end up in the wrong hands. Law-biding citizens should continue to have the right to bears arms in America. The key term here is law-biding, which does not apply to everyone. Restrictions have already been placed on owning firearms to help prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. There will always be loopholes though. People who are anti-gun will always want to ban them despite the consequences of doing so. There is no single solution to this controversial issue to satisfy both sides. I think America has done a great job with the restrictions already in place with firearms. 

 

Cell Phone Usage

Choose one way in which technology has changed human society and explain the impact of that change, positive and/or negative.

One major advancement of technology is the invention of the cell phone. This is a great tool as long as it is used in a safe manner. As our society advances, communication is a must in order to sustain its growth; however, there are many drawbacks to this new technology. People who use cell phones while driving increase their chances of being involved in an accident dramatically. Whether they are using cell phones to talk or text, they create a hazard on the road to themselves and to others. Restrictions need to be placed on motorists using their cell phones while driving. A study has shown that motorist who use their cell phones while driving are four times more likely to be involved in an accident. Whether that person is holding or using a hands free set for their cell phone, that person is distracted, and his/her chances of being involved in an accident are increased significantly. On the flipside, a person may argue that talking to a passenger poses the same risk. This argument can be quickly diffused due to the fact both the driver and passengers are all in the vehicle scanning for traffic and pedestrians. The person on the other side of the cell phone has absolutely no idea what is going on inside and around the vehicle. (http://www.controlyourimpact.com/2008/03/disadvantages-of-cell-phones-driving-safety/) Teens are especially at risk when using cell phones while driving. According to Edgar Snyder and Associates, teenagers have the equivalent reaction time of a 70-year-old person while using a cell phone behind the wheel. (http://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cell/statistics.html) That statement should be alarming to all drivers, especially parents. We all want our roads to be safer. So we need to act on this dangerous issue. In fact, the Federal Government already has to a certain extent. Commercial vehicle drivers are not allowed to use a hand held cell phone, or text while driving. If these drivers violate this law, they are subject to hefty fines. (http://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cell/index.html) This new law is great; however, these restrictions only apply to commercial drivers. Congress needs to pass this same law for all drivers. One might argue that commercial drivers need to use their cell phones for business purposes. There is nothing wrong with that, just pull off onto the side of the road before placing or answering a call. If you think about it, how many times have you witness someone at the wheel totally focused on their cell phone and nothing else. I have many times, and that person is always swerving on the road. Sooner or later, that person will be involved in an accident. It shouldn’t take an accident to make us wake up and realize cell phones are dangerous when using them while driving a vehicle. They do not go together, just like drinking and driving does not go together. We should set the proper example for everyone, and not use our cell pones while driving a vehicle.  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

First blog

Just checking to see if everything is working alright.