essays-papers-and-odditys

[essays-papers-and-odditys]

The Evil Reality of Student Debt.

Federal Student loans were first offered in 1958. Now, more than 60 years later, student loan debt makes up most of the average American's debt. In 2015, student debt totaled over 1,231 trillion dollars (Song). The average per borrower is 36,540 dollars, and that number is only getting higher. As of February 9th, 2022, the total national student loan total was over 1.75 Trillion dollars. Student loans are often stated to be the highest stressor of the average American. The average American, according to CNBC, has “$90,460” in debt (DeMatteo). Student debt is a plague upon the nation and needs to be dispelled.

    There are over 47,000 suicides per year in America on average. Over 24,000 college students each year attempt suicide. About 1,100 succeed in their attempt. That is approximately 2% of the number of national suicides. “Debt can lead to anxiety and depression… and affect a person's ability to go to work which further enhances financial struggles” (East). The strain of this overwhelming debt can be too much for some to bear. Therefore Student debt should simply do away with it before it does away with our youth.

    The average cost of living in America is 1,100 dollars per person per month (Kemenes). The average income from a job, that doesn’t require a college degree, is about 2,000 dollars a month. That is not nearly enough money to live in the US happily. To be happy as a citizen in the US, leaves said average citizen with roughly 900 dollars a month to enjoy. Given any unexpected payment, for example, a sudden need to change the brake pads on your car, they’d have to take on enough debt to make you more depressed than you’d be if you were living with 2000 a month.

    The Us is founded on the values of “we are endowed with certain unavailable rights bestowed on us by our creator” “the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. To properly do so in the modern-day we must have some form of secondary education. As Robbert Applebaum states in his essay “Debate on Student Loan Debt Doesn’t Go Far Enough” “Education should be a right, not a commodity reserved only for the rich” (Barnet et al. 1060).  

    In Justin Wolfer's essay “Forgive student loans? Worst idea ever”, he states the economic disruption of forgiving the loan, calling the idea of forgiving student debt “the worst macro policy I’ve ever heard of”. He describes those who are trapped under this debt as “kids who don’t want to pay their loans back” (Barnet et al. 1070). His answer to this problem is to “make loans more widely available” (Barnet et al. 1069). Not only is this mindset reductive to the reality of the situation, but it misses the whole point. While it is true that giving money away is bad for the economy, the are adverse effects of 1,000 students a year committing suicide prove to be worse in the long run. To treat the economy as if it is worth more than human life is disgusting.

The problem of student loan debt has plagued our people for 60 plus years. It has caused us to lose a grip on our mental health, our economy, and our liberty. Studnet loans and the debt in thereof has consistently led to the poor staying poor, and the rich getting richer. This is not an issue that can simply be ignored. We need swift immediate action now.

Works Cited

“Average College Tuition by State.” OnToCollege, 2 May 2021, https://www.ontocollege.com/average-college-tuition/.

“Average Salary with vs. without a College Degree.” Indeed Career Guide, https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/average-salary-with-college-degree-vs-without#:~:text=Employees%20who%20attended%20some%20college,with%20no%20college%20education%20whatsoever.

Barnet, Sylvan, et al. Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings. Bedford/St. Martins, 2020. 

“Cost of Living Data Series.” Cost of Living Data Series | Missouri Economic Research and Information Center, https://meric.mo.gov/data/cost-living-data-series.

DeMatteo, Megan. “The Average American Has $90,460 in Debt-Here's How Much Debt Americans Have at Every Age.” CNBC, CNBC, 18 Nov. 2021, https://www.cnbc.com/select/average-american-debt-by-age/#:~:text=While%20the%20average%20American%20has,loans%2C%20mortgages%20and%20student%20debt.

East, Sara. “How Debt and Financial Stress Affects Your Mental Health and Ways to Cope.” MoneyGeek.com, MoneyGeek.com, 5 Mar. 2022, https://www.moneygeek.com/debt/resources/how-debt-can-harm-your-health/#who-is-impacted-by-debt.

Edelson, David. “What Is the Typical Debt Load for Graduates of Four-Year Public Universities?” Association of Public & Land-Grant Universities, 27 Feb. 2020, https://www.aplu.org/projects-and-initiatives/college-costs-tuition-and-financial-aid/publicuvalues/student-debt.html.

Hanson, Melanie, and Fact Checked. “Average Cost of College [2022]: Yearly Tuition + Expenses.” Education Data Initiative, 27 Jan. 2022, https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-college.

Hanson, Melanie, and Fact Checked. “Average Student Loan Debt [2022]: By Year, Age & More.” Education Data Initiative, 3 Dec. 2021, https://educationdata.org/average-student-loan-debt.

Kemenes, Panna. “Cost of Living in the USA: Your 2021 Guide.” Wise, Wise, 1 Jan. 1970, https://wise.com/us/blog/cost-of-living-in-the-usa.

“A Look at the Shocking Student Loan Debt Statistics for 2022.” Student Loan Hero, 9 Feb. 2022, https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/#:~:text=Nearly%20%241.75%20trillion%20in%20total,of%20the%20crisis%20relief%20measures).

M.D., Paul S. Appelbaum, et al. “Law & Psychiatry: ‘Depressed? Get out!": Dealing with Suicidal Students on College Campuses.” Psychiatric Services, 1 July 2006, https://ps.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/ps.2006.57.7.914.

Song, Justin. “Average Student Loan Debt in America: Facts & Figures.” ValuePenguin, ValuePenguin, 25 Feb. 2022, https://www.valuepenguin.com/average-student-loan-debt#:~:text=Average%20Student%20Loan%20Debt%20in%20The%20United%20States,outstanding%20in%20student%20loan%20debt.

“Suicide Statistics.” American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, 28 Feb. 2022, https://afsp.org/suicide-statistics/.

This text provides general information. Statista assumes no liability for the information given being complete or correct. Due to varying update cycles, statistics can display more up-to-date data than referenced in the text. “Topic: Cost of Living in the United States.” Statista, https://www.statista.com/topics/768/cost-of-living/#dossierKeyfigures.

“Welcome to Governors State University in Chicago's Southland.” Governors State University, https://www.govst.edu/suicide-prevention/.

Wilcox, Holly C, et al. “Prevalence and Predictors of Persistent Suicide Ideation, Plans, and Attempts during College.” Journal of Affective Disorders, U.S. National Library of Medicine, Dec. 2010, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2924459/.

Zafarris, Jess. “The Origins of the Phrase ‘Pull Yourself up by Your Bootstraps.’” Useless Etymology, 7 Nov. 2019, https://uselessetymology.com/2019/11/07/the-origins-of-the-phrase-pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps/. 

[essays-papers-and-odditys]

Why We Should Choice Kindness

We shouldn’t tolerate intolerant speech on campus. Just like we shouldn’t tolerate it in everyday life. Hate speech and all other forms of intolerant speech are academically worthless, unproductive, and actually diminish posable academics. Hate speech has been a problem that has plagued us for almost all of eternity. Whether it’s name-calling on the playground or students calling their fellow students slurs on campus. Intolerance speech is something that has no place in a civilized society. 

Hate speech is defined by the oxford dictionary as “speech or writing that attacks or threatens a particular group of people, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation” (Oxford). Intolerance is defined as “the fact of not being willing to accept ideas or ways of behaving that are different from your own, religious intolerance, intolerance of minorities, intolerance for somebody/something a basic intolerance for other people and their culture” (Oxford). We can infer from this that intolerance breeds hate speech. So to reframe our central question, should we tolerate people who are likely to spew hate speech? Hate speech is something that is deeply harmful to civilization.

In 2019 Crystal Smith lost her son Kevin Rease Jr. Kevin had been facing some bullying at school. She figured that the bullying couldn’t be that bad. She never thought it would go as far as it did. Her son, who loved drawing and art, was described as having “the biggest smile” (Glover). He took his life. According to Allie Sauls, a child counselor at Heritage Behavioral Health Consultants,"It's becoming unfortunately quite an epidemic, and it's not just here, it's all over.. It is rampant in schools and I think that is because it is becoming so covert." (Glover). Drayke Hardman a 12-year-old killed himself on February 9th this year after being bullied at school (Yahoo). There are a plethora of similar stories that could be listed here. Hate speech and intolerant people are the giant problems that are being ignored.

Multiple studies have shown that showing kindness and patience for others will have positive benefits not only for the receiver, but the giving party as well. In China, researchers saw that when participants who acted altruistically seemed to have a better handle on physical tasks (Taylor and Francis). Another study out of California found that “two types of prosocial behavior led to greater increases in psychological flourishing than did self-focused and neutral behavior.” (Nelson, Layous, Cole, and Lyubomirsky). In short, demonstrating altruism not only benefits others but also has positive benefits for those who are performing said acts of kindness. One could say kindness may a price to be paid for the individual, it in fact helps society all grow as a whole. 

In their essay free speech and the paradox of tolerance, Julia Serano states the opposing viewpoint on the matter of intolerant speech quite well. She states that “Their views may adhere to free speech absolutism���(Barnet et al). She states that their argument can be broken down into “three main parts” (Barnet et al). The summary of which is that they value an individual's constitutional right to say whatever they want over the abundant amount of data, surveys, and sources stating that there is no excuse for that kind of intolerant viewpoint in modern society. 

Though it may be your right to say whatever you want. The constitution doesn’t free you from the consequences of your actions. We as a society shouldn’t have to tolerate intolerant people. They are absolutely a scourge upon our civilization. If we are to move forward as a people we should find a solution to this problem or else we are doomed to stagnate.

Works Cited

Barnet, Sylvan, et al. Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings. Bedford/St. Martins, 2020.

“Drayke Hardman: Who Was the 12-Year-Old Who Died by Suicide after Being Bullied at School?” Yahoo! News, Yahoo!, https://news.yahoo.com/drayke-hardman-obituary-12-old-215202310.html.

Glover, Chauncy. “Boy, 10, Kills Himself after Relentless Bullying, Mom Says.” ABC7 Chicago, WLS-TV, 26 Mar. 2019, https://abc7chicago.com/child-suicide-10-year-old-kills-himself-in-cy-fair-isd-kevin-reese/5218127/.

“The Helping Behavior Helps Lighten Physical Burden.” Taylor & Francis, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01973533.2017.1320762.

“Oxford Learner's Dictionaries: Find Definitions, Translations, and Grammar Explanations at Oxford Learner's Dictionaries.” Oxford Learner's Dictionaries | Find Definitions, Translations, and Grammar Explanations at Oxford Learner's Dictionaries, https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/.

S;, Nelson SK;Layous K;Cole SW;Lyubomirsky. “Do unto Others or Treat Yourself? the Effects of Prosocial and Self-Focused Behavior on Psychological Flourishing.” Emotion (Washington, D.C.), U.S. National Library of Medicine, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27100366/.

[essays-papers-and-odditys]

The Systems Bias

Do you believe the legal system works? Do you think that the people who deserve to get punished do so? Is the legal system broken? The definition of broken according to the Oxford dictionary is “no longer whole or working correctly” (Oxford). In other words, it is no longer working as intended. So what is the intended purpose of the legal system? The tale we are often told is that the system was built to help protect individual liberties and to guarantee the right to equal opportunity. Is that really what happens though? No.  What we see too often is the system subjugates minorities and oppresses the lower classes. We see that with situations like the war on drugs or the overwhelming statistical data showing that people of color are more likely to be arrested for the same crime and receive a harsher sentence than Caucasians. With the institutionalization of slave catchers as police officers, we see that the system was built to be bent, and unfair and lead to further success for the higher class.

    In the early 1700s, there were slave patrols whose whole job was to terrorize and capture runaway slaves. They were very popular up until the end of the American civil war when they were replaced with malta-style groups. They relentlessly enforced so-called “Black Codes”(The origins of modern-day policing NCAA). In 1868, with the passing of the 14th amendment, these groups were unintentionally made illegal.   The “black codes” were replaced with Jim Crow laws, and In the early 1900s, the militia was replaced with the common police officer. They were not only encouraged to over enforce strict rules on the black and other minority groups, but they were also actively rewarded for doing so. 

The war on drugs was according to Adam Gopnik “the growth of post-Rockefeller drug laws, which punished minor drug offenses with major prison time”(Barnet et al. 1206). It started under President Nixion in 1971. Behind the scenes, the true purpose was sinister. According to John Ehrlichman assistant to the president at the time “You want to know what this [war on drugs] was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course(,) we did.”(Drug War Confessional Vera) The war on drugs was about controling and disrupting the opposing poor classes to the system.

    We see a deep disparity between the rich who committed the same crime as the poor, yet the rich get lesser sentences. We see an even greater disparity between when a person of color commits a crime versus when a Caucasian commits the same crime. In 2016, we saw that for every white man that was in jail for a certain crime there were five black men in jail doing a longer sentence for the same crime (Same crime, more time Georgia State) (How many innocent people are jailed each year?: Baldani law). According to Martain Wright Edelman, “African Americans and Latinos comprise a segment of the U.S. prison population equal to that of six states”(Barnet et al. 1226).

    In 2016, we saw a cheating scandal in Atlanta Georgia, where teachers were going back to tests after students had failed and changed the answers to receive bonuses when the students improved. In basic terms, they were committing fraud to make more money. In 2008, Wall street traders falsified information to hand out larger loans so they could make much more money off of it through sale bonuses and commissions. In both cases, the individuals at fault falsified information and documentation to receive larger sums of money in their final paychecks. The only difference was that the teachers were arrested, and the wall street bakers were not.

Some will say that my assumption that the system was built to better benefit the rich and powerful higher classes, is baseless conjecture, that the system is broken because it’s meant to protect individual liberties and individual rights to equal opportunity. While I can understand that they are seeing the system as what it should be doing, and what the pitched purpose is, they are wrong in their assumption that the system was built to serve and protect everyone's equality. The system was built by the rich and powerful; they built it toward the standards they wanted. 

The Criminal justice system isn’t broken. It’s operating just as intended. It quells the lower classes for the ease of the higher classes. The whole purpose of this system is to serve the rich and powerful.

    Work Cited

Barnet, Sylvan, et al. Current Issues and Enduring Questions with 2020 APA and 2021 MLA Updates: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings. Bedford/St.Martin's, 2020. 

“Discover the Story of Englishmore than 600,000 Words, over a Thousand Years.” Home : Oxford English Dictionary, https://www.oed.com/. 

“Drug War Confessional.” Vera Institute of Justice, https://www.vera.org/reimagining-prison-webumentary/the-past-is-never-dead/drug-war-confessional?fbclid=IwAR3dBH6CLHfnaGXCF-rsihi6vLVPfOYdTHVONVFF3zbv5-D28zI31YV52CU.

Flock, Elizabeth. “APS (Atlanta Public Schools) Embroiled in Cheating Scandal.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 11 July 2011, https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/aps-atlanta-public-schools-embroiled-in-cheating-scandal/2011/07/11/gIQAJl9m8H_blog.html.

“How Many Innocent People Are Jailed Each Year?: Baldani Law.” Baldani Law Group, 6 Oct. 2021, https://baldanilaw.com/innocent-people-jailed-each-year/?fbclid=IwAR0pxLuSXJ0Fn7jpyvgOnr9BFtn54gAF8OAZNXMmjfxza57zTS4BFqF42WQ#:~:text=5%25%20of%20them%20.

“The Origins of Modern Day Policing.” NAACP, 3 Dec. 2021, https://naacp.org/find-resources/history-explained/origins-modern-day-policing?fbclid=IwAR1qW4ibXWfE7YLFU2iqdg7yu8qzKpZLM0MaDkEgHTk5kddwpfD7XzZk3Qs.

“Same Crime, More Time.” Georgia State News Hub, 12 Oct. 2020, https://news.gsu.edu/research-magazine/spring2020/incarceration.

Staff, NPR. “Legalize All Drugs? the 'Risks Are Tremendous' without Defining the Problem.” NPR, NPR, 27 Mar. 2016, https://www.npr.org/2016/03/27/472023148/legalize-all-drugs-the-risks-are-tremendous-without-defining-the-problem.

“Trends in Correctional Control - Key Findings.” Key Findings - Trends in Correctional Control, https://counciloncj.foleon.com/reports/trends-key-findings/key-findings/.

[essays-papers-and-odditys]

Why We Should Kill The Death Penalty

Capital punishment tracks back to the 18th century (History of the death penalty), with king Hammurabi of Babalon with code one saying, “If anyone ensnares another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death” (Code of Hammurabi). Thus, the concept of capital punishment was introduced to the world. Since its inception, there have been millions of executions. This caused the modern controversy over capital punishment, and whether or not it has a place in modern civilization. There are a plethora of arguments for why the death penalty should be abolished: Given the lack of statistical evidence of it being an efficient deterrent. Capital punishment is a deeply immoral, expensive, and racist policy. It results in a  complete waste of human life and potential. Along with this, there is a risk of potentially attracting those who wish to commit suicide by the system. Though it may feel justified to put those to death who has committed a heinous crime, there is a lack of evidence to support the claim that it should be maintained as a punishment.

    The question of whether or not capital punishment serves as a sufficient deterrent to the crimes it is used as punishment for has a long well-documented history tracking back to its conception. Though it may feel like the threat of death is a sufficient deterrent from certain awful atrocities, such as rape and murder, it must be kept in mind that the individuals who would commit said crimes tend not to be of sound mind and body (The population impact of severe mental illness on violent crime). So, to assume that they would see this as a straight logical conclusion may make sense from our perspective, but from one of a criminal, it doesn’t. “There is no conclusive evidence that the death penalty is more effective than any other punishment at deterring crime” when Minister X studied its effects in Singapore. (The death penalty, a deterrent?).

     The oldest and simplest justification for government is to be a  protector: protecting citizens from violence. That quest for protection has brought the government the unjust ability to commit murder, in the form of capital punishment. This implies that the government always is justified in its actions, including that of murder. with over fifteen hundred executions since 1976. That is more than the population of Watch Hill, Arizona. The government being able to murder their citizens under the protection of the law is a direct contradiction to their purpose. An institution such as the government cannot state that they are here to protect their citizens with one hand and with the other be pulling the lever of an electric chair, without some form of mistrust.

    The cost to a state to commit an execution is astronomical and is a misuse of the taxpayer’s contribution. In 2014, it cost the state of Kansas $400,000 to execute a prisoner, but in contrast, it only cost $100,000 to keep a prisoner incarcerated for life (Death penalty cost). That’s more than enough money to buy a house at the time. Another study out of California showed that the state spent over 4 billion dollars on executions (DPIC reports on costs). That is enough to feed a family of four for more than 100 years with adjusting for inflation (Hellmich). We could take the money that we blatantly waste on executions every year, and distribute some of the funds to community outreach programs to help prevent future incarcerations. We could send the other half to the prisons to improve the quality of life thereof. To execute a prisoner is an absolute waste of effort time and, money.

    Capital punishment has disproportionally the poor, those with intellectual disabilities, and those from minority groups. The data shows that three out of every five people put to death are a person of color. (Homepage)

This data is in connection with the knowledge that for every one white man in prison there are five black men in that prison for the same crime (Same crime, more time). Capital punishment is a tool used by officials to insert their bigoted bias. It disproportionately affects those of color in contrast to white Americans. The graphic above shows that capital punishment also greatly affects those with intellectual disabilities. An intellectual disability is defined as “a condition characterized by significant limitations in both intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior that originates before the age of 22” (Criteria).

    To assume that capital punishment is an appt use of our limited resources is nothing less than misinformed and ridiculous. Not only is the monetary cost astronomical but the loss of other resources. Consider for a moment the pure loss of human potential, over fifteen hundred people have been executed since 1979. Imagine what we could have gained from those people. They could have possibly been reformed. In the case where reformation is not possible, we could put them to work while in prison. Prison labor is an over one billion dollar industry (Profiting off of Prison Labor – Business Review at Berkeley). If they were unable to work it’s possible to use them as test subjects for the latest pharmaceuticals, though this is immoral, it serves to show that no matter the person there is always betterment to society to keep them around.

    One hundred and eighty-seven. That’s how many people since 1973 have been executed for a crime they didn’t commit (History of the death penalty). That is a thirteen percent failure rate. For a frame of reference, a ten percent failure rate is too high for a product such as an acne cream to hit shelves. This is only those who have proven to be innocent, imagine the number of individuals who were innocent that we will never know because their already dead and forgotten. This is unacceptable and frankly embarrassing, and the fact that the American people were okay with this for so long is simply astounding. To believe that capital punishment only affects the guilty is a belief held by an individual that is simply not living in reality.

    In an active democracy law, and policies are representative of the public’s opinion. The public’s opinion on capital punishment has dropped further than at any point in the last five decades according to a Gallup study that was conducted in two thousand and twenty (Jones). (Jones)

Which prompts the question. Why does society continue to propagate such an unpopular policy? It doesn’t serve any purpose to continue to execute people.  

Gary Gilmore was an American criminal who gained international attention for demanding the implementation of his death sentence for two murders he had admitted to committing in Utah in 1979. Gary pled guilty to the two counts of murder he was charged with, waived his right to a trial, and when asked about his sentencing stated "I'd prefer to be shot"(McShane). Gary was a very sick man having a personality disorder that wasn't maltreated at the time due to the limitations of 1970s medication, and treatment for mental health. It is widely believed that Gary committed such a heinous crime and pled the way he did to be executed. Gary wanted to commit suicide by way of the system. To believe that there have never been others similar to Gary is an act of separating one's self from reality. This fact alone should give those who champion capital punishment enough pause to possibly rethink their position.

Some would say that life without chance of parole is simply not harsh enough for these perpetrators. That they deserve to be punished to the furthest extent of the law. They shouldn't be suffered to live on taxpayer's dollars. These thought processes may feel right. It may feel like it is the correct position to hold. If society is to continue one must be able to forgive and allow for reformation. Citizens and officials need to be able to let these criminals have the chance to atone for their sins.. If not, how can one separate their inhumane tendencies from a criminal’s? No. life in prison is not a luxury experience. It’s an awful excruciating existence to live through, it is traumatizing to exist in, and it’s truly no way to live. If one is afraid that prison life is too good for them, it has endlessly proven not to be.

     In a synopsis, if someone was to be sentenced to capital punishment there is a decent chance there is probably a link to the corrupted American system. Often times these individuals sentenced to death are innocent. Their execution will cost taxpayers billions of dollars and their death will only further serve to isolate people in the U.S. Even if they’re guilty, theres’ a decent chance that they were sentenced because they were black, suicidal or had an intellectual disability. Though it may feel fair, and right to be brutal, and cruel to those who have treated others with brutality and cruelty it’s anything but. To believe that we are better than those we imprison. To hold to the belief that murder is wrong. Society must come to the understanding that to condemn murder with one hand and with the other to be executing prisoners, is deeply Hippocratic. A civilization must be willing to forgive those who have done awful things to move forward. We need to give up this biblical notion of an eye for an eye, otherwise, all of us are going to go blind.

Works Cited 

bytransformativejusticecollective, Posted. “The Death Penalty, a Deterrent?” Transformative Justice Collective, 19 May 2021, https://transformativejusticecollective.org/2020/10/14/the-death-penalty-a-deterrent/. 

“A Clear Scientific Consensus That the Death Penalty Does Not Deter.” Amnesty International USA, 18 June 2009, https://www.amnestyusa.org/a-clear-scientific-consensus-that-the-death-penalty-does-not-deter/.

“Code of Hammurabi.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 9 Nov. 2009, https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-history/hammurabi.

“Criteria.” AAIDD_CMS, American Association on Intellectual Developmental Disabilities, 2019, https://www.aaidd.org/intellectual-disability/definition.

“Death Penalty Cost.” Amnesty International USA, https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/death-penalty/death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost/.

“Does the Death Penalty Deter Crime? - Death Penalty - Procon.org.” Death Penalty, 20 Sept. 2021, https://deathpenalty.procon.org/questions/does-the-death-penalty-deter-crime/.

“DPIC Reports on Costs.” Death Penalty Information Center, Nov. 2019, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs/dpic-reports-on-costs.

“DPIC Reports.” Homepage, 19 Feb. 2018, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/research-facts/reports/p4.

“Early History of the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Information Center, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/history-of-the-death-penalty/early-history-of-the-death-penalty.

“Executions around the World.” Death Penalty Information Center, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/international/executions-around-the-world.

Hellmich, Nanci. “Cost of Feeding a Family of Four: $146 to $289 a Week.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 1 May 2013, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/01/grocery-costs-for-family/2104165/.

“History of the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Information Center, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/history-of-the-death-penalty.

“The History of the Death Penalty: A Timeline.” Death Penalty Information Center, 1 Dec. 2021, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/stories/history-of-the-death-penalty-timeline.

“Innocence Database.” Death Penalty Information Center, Nov. 2019, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence-database.

Jones, Jeffrey M. “Death Penalty Support Holding at Five-Decade Low.” Gallup.com, Gallup, 8 Mar. 2022, https://news.gallup.com/poll/357440/death-penalty-support-holding-five-decade-low.aspx.

McShane, Larry. “Daily News.” Google News Archive Search, Google, Apr. 1992, https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1696&dat=19920424&id=2b4cAAAAIBAJ&pg=6816%2C5675737.

“Mental Illness.” Death Penalty Information Center, 2 Apr. 2020, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/mental-illness.

Monday, Jan. 31. “After Gilmore, Who's next to Die?” After Gilmore, Who's Next to Die? - TIME, 31 Jan. 1977, https://web.archive.org/web/20081215111248/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,918639,00.html.

“National Polls and Studies.” Death Penalty Information Center, Nov. 2019, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/public-opinion-polls/national-polls-and-studies.

“Profiting off of Prison Labor – Business Review at Berkeley.” Business Review at Berkeley Business Review at Berkeley, https://businessreview.berkeley.edu/profiting-off-of-prison-labor/.

“Public Opinion.” Death Penalty Information Center, 25 Nov. 2019, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/public-opinion-polls.

S, Fazel. “The Population Impact of Severe Mental Illness on Violent Crime.” The American Journal of Psychiatry, U.S. National Library of Medicine, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16877653/.

“Same Crime, More Time.” Georgia State News Hub, 12 Oct. 2020, https://news.gsu.edu/research-magazine/spring2020/incarceration.

“Which Is Cheaper, Execution or Life in Prison Without Parole.” Hg.org, https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/which-is-cheaper-execution-or-life-in-prison-without-parole-31614. 

[essays-papers-and-odditys]

That's A Wrap On Censorship

For over one hundred years Hollywood has been the way that the United States broadcasted itself to the world. The United States film industry otherwise known as Hollywood is not sending its country into a state of moral decay. Since the early 1930s, the argument has been made that the Hollywood film industry should be restricted by legislators and censored. To argue against there being a cultural downfall in the United States is ridiculous, it’s blatantly obvious that the U.S is in a cultural downfall, but to attribute said downfall to the film industry more specifically Hollywood is nonsensical. In the case of Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio (Allen) in 1915 we saw the Supreme Court greatly restrict the protection of the First Amendment over the film industry, and in 1929 (Allen) a group of religious leaders in cooperation with Will Hays created the Hays Code (Allen). The concept that Hollywood is what is leading to the cultural downfall of the U.S. is often made by those who are leading to said downfall. The honest truth of this situation is that the cultural downfall of the United States has nothing to do with Hollywood.

To state that the government of the United States should interfere with Hollywood’s affairs via legislation for the sake of preserving the United States from a state of moral decay infers that the film industry is at fault for the state of moral decay, rather than Hollywood being a symptom of said cultural decay. To attribute and thus blame the American film industry for the cultural decay you would have to find some form of correlation or proof that the film industry was to blame for the decay of morals in theUnited States. There is no such correlation.

If the United States government was to interfere further than it currently has, it would result in further alienation of its citizens, and lessened cultural impact on a global scale.  The United States government should abstain from censoring films and other media outside of the current means that it has. The resentment the average American has for their government is astounding, and to posit that the government should censor the film industry off of the notion that it may be the reason that the nation is in a state of moral decline is ridiculous. This would only serve to further frustrate and agitate the general populous, who think that the government already has its hands in too many things. The American film industry is one of the largest contributors to the global film culture. For the American government to block it from being able to challenge beliefs, and power structures for some misguided idea of it being for the moral good of the nation is a deeply troubling concept. If Hollywood was to be blocked in such a manner it would only force us to forfeit our place as a global influencer on a theatrical level.

Billy Hallowell in their article for The Blaze titled “Hollywood Once had a Vibrant Moral and Ethical Code. What happened?“ states “Today, though, it’s not uncommon to see many actors and actresses doing very little to ensure their work has a positive impact on society and, in particular, on youths. There’s certainly been a cost to that dynamic” (Hallowell). as if there is a responsibility that goes along with the position of being an actor. American Greatness posits that we must protect the children from movies such as “Carrie, Bonnie, and Clyde, and Friday The 13th” (Spence) which are all rated R. When you go to see an R-rated movie you are forced to show your I.D. and you have to be 18 years old or older. Thusly, no children are watching Carrie without their parent's knowledge. The concept that the general populous mindlessly imitate art without thought of morals or reserve for the consequences of their actions is laughable. 

Works Cited

Allen, Nathan. “Censoring the Movies — What was the “Hays Code” | by Nathan Allen | Frame of Reference.” Medium, 23 November 2020, https://medium.com/frame-of-reference/censoring-the-movies-what-was-the-hays-code-e44a025e2823. Accessed 21 April 2022.

Hallowell, Billy. “Hollywood once had a vibrant moral and ethical code. What happened?” TheBlaze, 14 March 2017, https://www.theblaze.com/contributions/hollywood-once-had-a-vibrant-moral-and-ethical-code-what-happened#toggle-gdpr. Accessed 21 April 2022.

Rosenberg, Alyssa. “Hollywood is quick to cry censorship. The industry's not wrong to be afraid.” The Washington Post, 10 July 2015, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/07/10/hollywood-is-quick-to-cry-censorship-the-industrys-not-wrong-to-be-afraid/. Accessed 21 April 2022.

Spence, Karl. “Hollywood's Happy Hoodlum Makes Murder Routine › American Greatness.” American Greatness, 25 May 2019, https://amgreatness.com/2019/05/25/hollywoods-happy-hoodlum-makes-murder-routine/. Accessed 21 April 2022.