“Society would be safer if we had security cameras in public places to catch potential criminals”
After reading this book, my opinion for this statement hasn’t change at all from the first blog. We need cameras for criminal purposes, but not for everything. We still need cameras in the public places such as malls, stores, outside in the some streets, parking lots, but not private houses. We need them for protection, but not for finding mistakes to be putted into jail.
In 1984, the telescreens were everywhere. Just one unusual movement that you make could have you arrested. Just looking at someone straight in the eyes could cause to be arrested. That’s why when Winston and Julia met in the park; they didn’t dare to face each other while they were talking, because they were afraid if the telescreen detected something is mysterious going on between them.
Overall, cameras will make the environment better than before since people are aware of their actions. Since in 1984, everything that seems like abnormal you will get arrested, but in our society, people will violent actions that are disturbing will be caught.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Marvin Eng - "Torture of a person who is a threat to our country's freedom is acceptable as long as the person does not die"
i don't believe that torture in any form is acceptable, no matter how dangerous a person is to the country. Our country believes in freedom and justice, and torture in many cases is worse than death which is not justice. Near the end of the book Winston is captured by the Party and is tortured by O'Brien. Winston was not even very dangerous to the Party and Winston was tortured to the point of close insanity. No matter what the situation torture should not be the answer.
-Marvin Eng
-Marvin Eng
Max David - Part threeeee
The only way to prepare for peace is to be prepared for war.
At first reading this, I didn't think much of it and said that it was an untrue statement. I thought "oh that's not true, we can use cupcakes to offer peace, it'll be great." However, after reading the book and thinking more deeply on the subject, I realize that warfare very essential for not only countries for peace, but for all countries in general.
Having no weapons or warfare just means you’re leaving yourself exposed to others. Why would you leave yourself and your country an open target? If a country has anything of value to anyone (land, wealth, resources, etc), then someone else is going to envy it. Having nothing to fight with will just provide more incentive to invade, as nothing can stop them. Or, maybe you're on the other end of the bargain and YOU want to take something from someone else. You'll have no resources to invade or conquer anyone. Having a ready army, navy, and air force is necessary for stopping fights and starting fights, especially in today's modern age.
The fact that nearly every, if not every country has means of killing and threats serves as proof to this. It’s good to have power, and power is easily derived from a full arsenal. Just look at all of the nuclear conflicts of today. The struggle for and against armaments is an ongoing conflict, and will most likely never stop. Warfare is important to own, for protection and domination.
At first reading this, I didn't think much of it and said that it was an untrue statement. I thought "oh that's not true, we can use cupcakes to offer peace, it'll be great." However, after reading the book and thinking more deeply on the subject, I realize that warfare very essential for not only countries for peace, but for all countries in general.
Having no weapons or warfare just means you’re leaving yourself exposed to others. Why would you leave yourself and your country an open target? If a country has anything of value to anyone (land, wealth, resources, etc), then someone else is going to envy it. Having nothing to fight with will just provide more incentive to invade, as nothing can stop them. Or, maybe you're on the other end of the bargain and YOU want to take something from someone else. You'll have no resources to invade or conquer anyone. Having a ready army, navy, and air force is necessary for stopping fights and starting fights, especially in today's modern age.
The fact that nearly every, if not every country has means of killing and threats serves as proof to this. It’s good to have power, and power is easily derived from a full arsenal. Just look at all of the nuclear conflicts of today. The struggle for and against armaments is an ongoing conflict, and will most likely never stop. Warfare is important to own, for protection and domination.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Aidan Lawrence- Part Tres
"We should have security cameras in public places to catch potential criminals"
I agree with this to a certain extent, in and that it would definitely cut down on crimes, particularly shoplifting and pickpocketing. I agree with this because almost all public places already have them, such as stores, bus stations, and shopping malls. The only place we don't have them is in our homes, and in parks. I don't think that having them in parks is a terrible idea, but i strongly disagree with having them in our homes. No one needs to know what goes on inside some else's house, not even the government. Right to privacy is in our constitution, and no one should be able to take that away from us. If we're in public, then nothing we do necessitates the right to privacy, because anyone could see us doing it anyway.
I agree with this to a certain extent, in and that it would definitely cut down on crimes, particularly shoplifting and pickpocketing. I agree with this because almost all public places already have them, such as stores, bus stations, and shopping malls. The only place we don't have them is in our homes, and in parks. I don't think that having them in parks is a terrible idea, but i strongly disagree with having them in our homes. No one needs to know what goes on inside some else's house, not even the government. Right to privacy is in our constitution, and no one should be able to take that away from us. If we're in public, then nothing we do necessitates the right to privacy, because anyone could see us doing it anyway.
Lillian Brown "Torture" II
"Torture of a person who is a threat to our country's freedom is acceptable as long as the person does not die."
Previously I stated that I believed strategic torture which did not damage the sanity of the subject who was a threat could be acceptable. After completing the book, however, I've changed my mind. I now believe you cannot torture someone in any manner and not damage their sanity and their values. Torture, whether the individual dies or not, is violating the person's personal knowledge and can lead to such mental destitution, whatever information they can provide maybe faulty.
The torture of a person who is simply a threat, but where no new knowledge can be gleaned from their torture, is simply heartless. They have made decisions and have had experiences which defined their current state by torturing them, in hopes of reform, their mental state will simply become confused and unreliable.
Previously I stated that I believed strategic torture which did not damage the sanity of the subject who was a threat could be acceptable. After completing the book, however, I've changed my mind. I now believe you cannot torture someone in any manner and not damage their sanity and their values. Torture, whether the individual dies or not, is violating the person's personal knowledge and can lead to such mental destitution, whatever information they can provide maybe faulty.
The torture of a person who is simply a threat, but where no new knowledge can be gleaned from their torture, is simply heartless. They have made decisions and have had experiences which defined their current state by torturing them, in hopes of reform, their mental state will simply become confused and unreliable.
Melissa Wong: PART III - Tourture of a person who is a threat to our country's freedom is acceptable as long as the person does not die.
I still disagree with this statement. In the book, 1984, no one has "freedom" in that society. There are telescreens everywhere, watching your every move. They spy on people who have their own thoughts, and arrest them. The Party tortures people who has the desire for freedom. Winston tries every way to obtain freedom, even if he has to go against the Party. But when he gets caught trying to be "free," he get tortured. Winston gets tortured by his greatest fear in Room 101. This book and the Party contradicts the whole statement.
Even though they are a threat to our country's freedom, it doesn't mean it's okay for them to be tortured. It's inhumane. In the book, Winston is tortured, but he's basically dead in the inside. "Inner-Winston" is dead and its only remains are an empty shell. After he gets tortured, he has no feelings of his own, no point of view, and no thoughts. He is dead internally.
Even though they are a threat to our country's freedom, it doesn't mean it's okay for them to be tortured. It's inhumane. In the book, Winston is tortured, but he's basically dead in the inside. "Inner-Winston" is dead and its only remains are an empty shell. After he gets tortured, he has no feelings of his own, no point of view, and no thoughts. He is dead internally.
Johannes Harkins - Part 3 - Prompt 5
"People who are a serious threat to the government should be able to held in prison without being charged."
I believe that people who are improsined have a right to fail trial and to have knowledge of the charges pressed against them. The contistution gives everyone the right to a fair trial & to know their charges. However the Patriot Act allows enemy combatants to be held without a charge or a trial, a law that I belive is incredibly uncostitutional and is immoral.
I believe that people who are improsined have a right to fail trial and to have knowledge of the charges pressed against them. The contistution gives everyone the right to a fair trial & to know their charges. However the Patriot Act allows enemy combatants to be held without a charge or a trial, a law that I belive is incredibly uncostitutional and is immoral.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)