For this week's blog, you need to go and look at all of the entries that were left on last week's blog by your classmates. Scroll through the comments you find there, and find a viewpoint or answer with which you do not necessarily agree. (Feel free to play devil's advocate if you have to.)
Then, USING THE CONCESSION-COUNTERARGUMENT MODEL, politely debate the topic at hand, providing examples of why you believe your viewpoint to be correct. Note: If you do not use the concession-counterargument model, you will not receive credit for this post.
Abby Ingle
ReplyDeleteI understand Kryana's view on stricter gun laws, and believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, I have to disagree. I, unlike her, believe that America does not need stricter gun laws. Many people use guns for protection, and that right should not be taken away because of violent or un-responsible people. Guns are not the only weapons available. If a person really wanted to harm someone, they would find a way to do it, no matter what the law says.
In response to Tanner's answer to the question about prejudice;
ReplyDeleteI respect your opinion, but I disagree. I do understand where you're coming from with the example of 9/11, but I feel that it's still wrong to discriminate one because of their race/religion. Yes, many terrorists from the 9/11 situation were from the Middle East, but there are still plenty of Caucasian terrorists from the United States. For example, Timothy McVeigh who killed over 100 people in Oklahoma City in 1995 because he disagreed with the government treatment of a white separatist in Waco, Texas. He acted out as retaliation against his government. And Ted Kaczynski, who managed to elude the FBI for over 20 years and sent bombs to individuals involved US airlines and universities. And also Jared Loughner, who killed 6 people in attempt to assassinate congress woman Gabrielle Giffords due to his belief in a New World Order. Also, there could be Caucasians coming to America from places such as Great Britain, New England, Australia, etc. in terrorist attempt, but they would not be stopped for the fact they are white. But, I do understand where you're coming from.
Kailee Post
kayla Compton
ReplyDeleteI understand what Abby (Ingle) is saying, but I believe that the story does lend a hand in creating stricter gun laws, though if people had the intent to kill or harm anyone they could use other weapons, as abby said, but I also believe the gun laws should be stricter because of how readily available guns are, especially in the south, and how impersonal and easy the use of a gun can make murders. guns are used now by criminals and in war because guns have more pros than cons when in contrast with a knife or a close range weapon. guns can shoot from a distance and the person behind the trigger would have less of a chance getting taken down before the shot is fired as well as seeing the terror in the eyes of those around when the victim is shot.
Brooke Allen
ReplyDelete--Kryana Brown
1) F. Glen Miller is a man who is foe Hitler's beliefs and teachings. (Nazi)
2) Neo-Nazism are social or political movements seeking to revive Nazism. It pretty much is the modern day form of Nazi
3) "To Kill a Mockingbird". This is ironic because the man (supremacist) tried to kill innocent people that don't intentionally do wrong because of their race, just like mockingbirds, innocent and minding themselves.
4) Adam Hamilton is the church's senior pastor
5) I don't believe that being prejudice should be acceptable. My reasons aren't completely bias because growing up as an African American can cause a lot of prejudiceness against you. Now in some cases like terrorism can be negotiable, however prejudicness is still wrong but still happens because of the fear from millions of lives being lost from terrorist attacks.
6) I believe that America should have stricter gun laws. Guns are being placed into the hands of mental and crazy people that shouldn't possess these deadly tools. Like always, people will find ways to go around the law (break it) to still obtain guns that they shouldn't have. This has the potential to become a great controversy, but is worth the hundred lives that can be possibly saved. I am willing to give up a few gun rights for the protection of America as a whole.
Kryana Brown
Although I see your point, I dont completly agree with you on your last point.
I do agree that the mentally unstable shouldn't be allowed to possess arms, but I don't agree that more gun laws would resolve this. There are a lot af ways to possess a gun that don't involve purchasing and registering it. If someone really wants a gun, they'll find a way to get one, such as stealing and the black market. And if, for example, someone went on a rampage shooting people, if no one else had a gun there, a lot more people would die opposed to if there were. Guns are very important for safty and every house-hold (assumimg the mentally unstable couldn't access them and they didn't live alone) should have at least one hand-gun for protection.
mills Harrison
ReplyDeleteI disagree with marie doyle I think every one should have a gun because everyone needs protection and if the government were to issue a gun law there would be more violence then there already is because the people would fight and kill people to keep there guns I know that they would have and remember the struggle of trying to take my guns. I plead the second amendment