essay 2 final

Bryce Quigley

Eric Leake

Writ 1122

March 11, 2013

What To Do With Guns

The second amendment, adopted by the United States on December 15, 1791 in order to give the citizens of America the right to bear arms. Now over two hundred years later this amendment has come under a lot of scrutiny. People are questioning if it is a good law and whether it needs to be changed immediately. The idea to change the second amendment is very controversial and over the past few months has been a major topic in the political scene. The following follows the spider web effect the Sandy Hook shooting has had on the second amendment.

            December 14, 2012, twenty-six children as well as adults are gunned down at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newton Connecticut. The shooter was identified as Adam Lanza a 24-year-old man whose mom worked at the school. It was reported that Lanza had three guns as he entered the school (NewsTimes). This shooting event can be identified as the day that started the recent gun control outburst. Some say gun control issues goes back to a shooting in Colorado when a man killed twelve and injured 58 others using high-powered weaponry. These first reports were often inaccurate as the reports came out in a quick and frantic manner.

 Nonetheless these recent shooting have caused a long chain of events to spur. Just four days after the Sandy Hook massacre, Fox news showed gun prices and ammunition prices rising significantly(Fox News). People immediately started buying guns, all because they were worried that soon they would not be able to under the protection of the second amendment. People are clearly scared that something like this may happen again. When is does happen more people want to be prepared in order to stop something terrible.

            December 20, 2012, a report is released by PewResearch stating the new change in opinion on gun control. It stated that as of December 19 about 49% of the us population believe that controlling gun ownership is a must while only 42% believed that gun rights should be protected, 9% were not opinionated. These beliefs are almost equally divided and because of that this topic becomes extremely controversial. In order to repeal a constitutional amendment there needs to be two thirds support in both the house of representative and the Senate. With the current split in beliefs this would be impossible. Furthermore 42% believe strongly in gun control while 37% believe strongly in keeping the right of the second amendment(Pew Research Center for the People and the Press RSS). With two sides so separated as well as holding strong beliefs it can be immediately seen that this is going to cause issues in the government. This form of reporting was purely statistics. However the information may have been skewed depending on who/ where they polled the information.

            December 21, 2012, the National Rifle Association makes a statement regarding their own beliefs of on gun control. In the statement a NRA representative is quoted saying “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,’’. The NRA thoroughly believes that the only way to stop these massacres, such as the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, is some other officer or good citizen with a gun. If there are more armed citizens with good intentions, they will be able to stop the people who are looking to kill. The National Rifle Association has gone under scrutiny during the new conference there were “two interruptions by gun-control proponents unfurling signs and shouting “NRA, stop killing our children’’ and “NRA has blood on its hands.’’ People are very upset with the current control laws and they are making it clear by speaking outwardly about it. There are very strong opposing viewpoints and it was made clear during this news conference.

            January 15, 2013, President Obama makes his first official address regarding the laws on gun control and the possible future. The address proposes an assault weapon ban as well as background checks for gun buyers. "There are specific legislative actions that he will continue to call on Congress to take, including the assault weapons ban, including a measure to ban high-capacity magazine clips, including an effort to close the very big loopholes in the background check system in our country,”( Reuters.). This comes exactly one month after the Newtown elementary school shooting. This proposal was Barack’s first official announcement on gun policies since coming into office just over 4 years ago. This announcement was very important because it shows that the president is recognizing that there is an issue with current gun control. This policy would not fully remove the second amendment but it would serve as a system of regulation. According to the Obama administration large clips and assault weapons are not necessary for normal citizens to own or use. The second amendment, a 200 year law, is getting redefined and is in jeopardy of being changed. President Obama, being a democrat has very liberal views on policies like this. Republicans and Democrats are the most separated in history right now and this new controversy is adding to that separation.

            January 16, 2013, the National Rifle Association responds directly to Obama’s proposal on regulating weapons. A NRA representative was quoted saying "Barack Obama, Joe Biden and their gun ban allies in Congress only want to BLAME you, VILIFY you, BULLY you, and STRIP you of your Second Amendment freedoms,"( The Huffington Post). The battle between the two sides gets heated. It is no longer stating beliefs, but this is rather a direct attack from the NRA on Obama. They both want to protect citizens as best as possible but they have completely different ideas on how to execute that. The National Rifle Association also released a commercial calling Obama an “elitist hypocrite” because his children have their own bodyguards while normal children have to go to school unprotected. The NRA was clearly upset with the proposal Obama gave and they were not going to let it go without a response.

            Febuary 12, 2013, Obama gives the State of The Union address to the country. This is where he updates the country on current policies and tell the citizens what the government is doing. During the address Obama faces the issue on gun control. He made an emotional speech saying, "Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress," he said. "If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun." This proposal allows for a democratic vote in the house and senate. Obama want to make a fair decision in the policy regarding gun control. During the speech Obama also makes it clear his stance on the issue. He tells a story about a little girl that went

 "One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house,". (The Huffington Post)

 The sentimental story gives a perspective on what gun control could actually solved if it were enacted. Obama even describes the girl so that the average parent or sibling could personally relate and feel an emotional connection to her death.

            March 2, 2013 and article is released by Fox news regarding gun control specifically in the state of Colorado. The gun control policy is not just controversial on the national level but it is also up for debate on the state level as well. As noted before Colorado had a mass shooting in a movie theatre and since then the state has been revaluating their policy. The bill calls for making  “it a crime to have magazines that can carry more than 15 rounds, with a stricter limit of eight for shotguns. People who own larger magazines now would be allowed to keep them.”( Fox News) Although this proposal is not extreme, it does call for change, which many people are opposed to. Gun control may have an economic effect as well; there is one gun company that is threatening to leave Colorado if the bill passes. This article from Fox News is written in a very liberal way. The reader could definitely understand that Fox was trying to describe why gun control would be productive.

            So far there is no definite policy regarding gun control. As of now the second amendment is safe and anyone eighteen or older is free to buy all the guns they would like. The conflicting sides have created a heated battle that may not be solved anytime soon. However, the policy is going to be voted on soon and those once legal guns may not be legal anymore. The policy that the government makes a decision one is going to have a lot of repercussions. It is unclear what direction the country is moving in at the moment. One thing that is clear is the country is separated when it comes to guns and even when a decision is made there are going to be some unhappy people one way or another.

Works Cited

"911 Sandy Hook Call Shows Early Confusion." NewsTimes. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"After Newtown, Modest Change in Opinion about Gun Control." Pew Research Center for the People and the Press RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"Company Will Move If Colorado Approves Gun Control." Fox News. FOX News Network, 02 Mar. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"Gun Sales Surge after Connecticut Massacre." Fox News. FOX News Network, 18 Dec. 2012. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

Mason, Jeff. "Obama to Propose Sweeping Gun Control Measures Wednesday." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 15 Jan. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"Politicssource." Politicssource. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

Wilkie, Christina. "NRA Slams Obama Gun Control Proposal." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

Wilkie, Christina. "Obama State Of The Union Speech Demands Vote On Gun Control Bills." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 12 Feb. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

writing the news and this class

Writing and the news... Well so far this class has certainly set a specific structure for me when it come to the news. Because of this writing class I started paying a bit more attention to the new whether it was just listening in on something someone was saying or even checking the interweb once every other day. I truly enjoy the blog style of writing we used in this class because I was able to use words like "interweb" and I didn't have to structure my writing as if I were a robot. My writing style definitely was a "train of thought" style throughout the course, which I found to be quiet enjoyable. In the future I will be able to use this skill to insert more of a personal voice in to my writing. Overall I feel like I can take some productive skills away from this class.

What To Do With Guns

Bryce Quigley

Writ 1122

March 3, 2013

What To Do With Guns

The second amendment, adopted by the United States on December 15, 1791 in order to give the citizens of America the right to bear arms. Now over two hundred years later this amendment has come under a lot of scrutiny. People are questioning if it is a good law and whether it needs to be changed immediately. The idea to change the second amendment is very controversial and over the past few months has been a major topic in the political scene.

            December 14, 2012, twenty-six children as well as adults are gunned down at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newton Connecticut. The shooter was identified as Adam Lanza a 24-year-old man whose mom worked at the school. It was reported that Lanza had three guns as he entered the school. This shooting event can be identified as the day that started the recent gun control outburst (http://www.newstimes.com/policereports/article/911-Sandy-Hook-call-shows-early-confusion-4127274.php ). Some say gun control issues goes back to a shooting in Colorado when a man killed twelve and injured 58 others using high-powered weaponry. Nonetheless these recent shooting have caused a long chain of events to spur. Just four days after the Sandy Hook massacre, Fox news showed gun prices and ammunition prices rising significantly. People immediately started buying guns, all because they were worried that soon they would not be able to under the protection of the second amendment. People are clearly scared tht something like this may happen again. When is does happen more people want to be prepared in order to stop something terrible. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/18/gun-sales-surge-after-connecticut-massacre/ )

            December 20, 2012, a report is released by PewResearch stating the new change in opinion on gun control. It stated that as of December 19 about 49% of the us population believe that controlling gun ownership is a must while only 42% believed that gun rights should be protected, 9% were not opinionated. These beliefs are almost equally divided and because of that this topic becomes extremely controversial. In order to repeal a constitutional amendment there needs to be two thirds support in both the house of representative and the Senate. With the current split in beliefs this would be impossible. Furthermore 42% believe strongly in gun control while 37% believe strongly in keeping the right of the second amendment. With two sides so separated as well as holding strong beliefs it can be immediately seen that this is going to cause issues in the government (http://www.people-press.org/2012/12/20/after-newtown-modest-change-in-opinion-about-gun-control/ ).

            December 21, 2012, the National Rifle Association makes a statement regarding their own beliefs of on gun control. In the statement a NRA representative is quoted saying “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,’’. The NRA thoroughly believes that the only way to stop these massacres, such as the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, is some other officer or good citizen with a gun. If there are more armed citizens with good intentions, they will be able to stop the people who are looking to kill. The National Rifle Association has gone under scrutiny during the new conference there were “two interruptions by gun-control proponents unfurling signs and shouting “NRA, stop killing our children’’ and “NRA has blood on its hands.’’ People are very upset with the current control laws and they are making it clear by speaking outwardly about it. There are very strong opposing viewpoints and it was made clear during this news conference.

http://blog.timesunion.com/politicssource/nras-big-announcement-put-guns-in-every-school-that-wants-it/3874/#8998-4

            January 15, 2013, President Obama makes his first official address regarding the laws on gun control and the possible future. The address proposes an assault weapon ban as well as background checks for gun buyers. "There are specific legislative actions that he will continue to call on Congress to take, including the assault weapons ban, including a measure to ban high-capacity magazine clips, including an effort to close the very big loopholes in the background check system in our country,”. This comes exactly one month after the Newtown elementary school shooting. This proposal was Barack’s first official announcement on gun policies since coming into office just over 4 years ago. This announcement was very important because it shows that the president is recognizing that there is an issue with current gun control. This policy would not fully remove the second amendment but it would serve as a system of regulation. According to the Obama administration large clips and assault weapons are not necessary for normal citizens to own or use. The second amendment, a 200 year law, is getting redefined and is in jeopardy of being changed. President Obama, being a democrat has very liberal views on policies like this. Republicans and Democrats are the most separated in history right now and this new controversy is adding to that separation. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/15/us-usa-guns-violence-idUSBRE90E0UF20130115 )

            January 16, 2013, the National Rifle Association responds directly to Obama’s proposal on regulating weapons. A NRA representative was quoted saying "Barack Obama, Joe Biden and their gun ban allies in Congress only want to BLAME you, VILIFY you, BULLY you, and STRIP you of your Second Amendment freedoms,". The battle between the two sides gets heated. It is no longer stating beliefs, but this is rather a direct attack from the NRA on Obama. They both want to protect citizens as best as possible but they have completely different ideas on how to execute that. The National Rifle Association also released a commercial calling Obama an “elitist hypocrite” because his children have their own bodyguards while normal children have to go to school unprotected. The NRA was clearly upset with the proposal Obama gave and they were not going to let it go without a response. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/nra-obama-gun-control_n_2489693.html )

            Febuary 12, 2013, Obama gives the State of The Union address to the country. This is where he updates the country on current policies and tell the citizens what the government is doing. During the address Obama faces the issue on gun control. He made an emotional speech saying, "Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress," he said. "If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun." This proposal allows for a democratic vote in the house and senate. Obama want to make a fair decision in the policy regarding gun control. During the speech Obama also makes it clear his stance on the issue. He tells a story about a little girl that went "One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house,". The sentimental story gives a perspective on what gun control could actually solved if it were enacted. Obama even describes the girl so that the average parent or sibling could personally relate and feel an emotional connection to her death. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/obama-state-of-the-union_n_2647639.html )

            March 2, 2013 and article is released by Fox news regarding gun control specifically in the state of Colorado. The gun control policy is not just controversial on the national level but it is also up for debate on the state level as well. As noted before Colorado had a mass shooting in a movie theatre and since then the state has been revaluating their policy. The bill calls for making  “it a crime to have magazines that can carry more than 15 rounds, with a stricter limit of eight for shotguns. People who own larger magazines now would be allowed to keep them.” Although this proposal is not extreme, it does call for change, which many people are opposed to. Gun control may have an economic effect as well; there is one gun company that is threatening to leave Colorado if the bill passes.  (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/02/company-will-move-if-colorado-approves-gun-control/ )

            So far there is no definite policy regarding gun control. As of now the second amendment is safe and anyone eighteen or older is free to buy all the guns they would like. The conflicting sides have created a heated battle that may not be solved anytime soon. However, the policy is going to be voted on soon and those once legal guns may not be legal anymore. The policy that the government makes a decision one is going to have a lot of repercussions. It is unclear what direction the country is moving in at the moment. One thing that is clear is the country is separated when it comes to guns and even when a decision is made there are going to be some unhappy people one way or another.

1000 words in a picture?

In the article “Liar Liar Pants on Fire” by Errol Morris, he argues that a picture is not always worth one thousands word, but a picture without words can be meaningless. I agree with parts of his argument however disagree with other parts.

I enjoy how Morris makes the argument that a picture can be “true or false”. When you take it upon yourself to interpret a picture, you are not necessarily getting the complete truth or any truth at all. When the is a fact or caption next to the picture the reader/ viewer is able to get a much more accurate depiction of what the photo is actually portraying. Morris describes a photo like this is this quote “Without a caption, without a context, without some idea about what the picture is a picture of, I can't answer. I simply cannot talk about the photograph as being true or false independently of beliefs about the picture. A captionless photograph, stripped of all context, is virtually meaningless. I need to know more”.

Although I do I agree that a caption can add a lot of value to a photo, I do not believe that a photo is “virtually meaningless” without it. I believe that a picture is still worth a thousand words it just may not be the one thousand words it was originally purposed for. The viewer has the power to see what they want and a picture can be interpreted in so many ways. I think in a sense a picture is worth more words if there is not a caption added. Although Morris does have several good points I do not believe in what he is trying to convince me of. Pictures will always have meaning even if there are absolutely no words attachted.

taking an approach

            The way I look at “taking an approach” is taking an article and combining, rewriting, countering, and forwarding while adding a unique voice into your own article. Taking an approach is a way to turn any article to something that has your own voice and ideas. With taking an approach you are reshaping another work “Otherwise you are simply applying ideas to examples. To transform is to reshape, not replace or rebut. The original does not go away but is remade into something new” (74). Taking an approach is crucial when it come to differentiating a piece of writing that one creates.

            The New York Times has a very distinct approach on most of their articles. With the New York Times they try to write from a non-opinionated stance without to much personal emotion. I think that is this form and personal connection to the story is lost. On the other hand it is easy to see the facts and therefore be able to form your own opinion. On the other hand I have talked about a blog I read called Barstoolu. This blog is extremely opinionated and is specifically written toward the audience of college-aged students. With this type of “stance” you get a lot of opinions and ideas written directly into the article. It is very easy to connect to, forward, or counter but on the other hand I think specific facts are lost in translation. With direct written opinions often times emotions get in the way and in that sense the writing can be skewed.

            I believe that taking and approach when writing is crucial that you make it clear the direction you are portraying in order to be as unique as possible.

covering the sex change

Bryce Quigley

Writ 1122

February 15, 2013

Covering the Sex Change

I read a very biased college blog called Barstoolu. Typically they take an article and look at it from a ridiculous point of view. They first summarize the article then give a personal take on the same article. If I were to take an article such as this and write it for barstool this is what is would sound like.

            Recently Brown University became the 36^th college to start having their insurance cover gender reassignment surgery. In addition to 36 colleges that cover the surgery there are 25 other colleges that will cover related hormone treatments. This idea is still radical but it is a large step in recognizing transgender rights. This directly affects a small group of students but it is another step toward equality. It is no longer just recognizing that trans-genders can use their respectable bathroom, it is taking it to the next level. There has been a guide for transgender students released online that includes Brown as a top ten transgender friendly school.

 This trend is something we are seeing not only in colleges but also about a quarter of fortune 500 companies support the same or similar insurance policy. Gender reassignment surgery is a complex process that requires psychological treatment as well as hormone treatment. The entire process costs tens of thousands of dollars, however colleges are not concerned about that, as it is a process that is rarely seeked. Transgender issues are relatively new around campuses in the United States. Even in colleges that are progressive about gay and lesbian rights can still be relatively naïve about the issue. www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/education/12sexchange.html?hp&_r=0

            According to the New York Times Brown University just released a statement saying that their health care program will cover “gender reassignment surgery”. Brown is now the thirty-sixth university to do so. Only six years ago this type of thing was unheard of and now it is becoming a bit of a norm. They are now not only supporting transgender people but they are now financially helping people who want the surgery. I am not sure about you but seriously? I am all for supporting people who are transgender or people who want to change their lives in that way. But to have a University help pay for it with insurance is just silly. If every type of plastic surgery was supported like this girls would be getting breast implants left and right and the country would be full of synthetic people. I think that if you want a surgery this drastic you should have to go out of your way to take the measures, not have an insurance company pay for it.

            According to Princeton, Brown is one of the top ten-transgender friendly schools. That is something I fully support. I believe everyone should be treated equally no matter his or her race, ethnicity, gender, or personal views. But this is so radical it seems to be encouraging something that is very extreme.

            I fully encourage people to be themselves but to have insurance to cover an extensive plastic surgery process seems a bit intense.

Charlie review:

1.     A times article that covers transgender surgery at universities.  The audience is other college students who are the majority on barstoolu and the purpose seems to be purely informational for the reader. 

2.     It seems to be written more loosely and is very easy to understand it also has an opinion at the end of the article so it seems to be written in more of a blogging format.

3.     Maybe introduce the article that you are talking about if you are planning to keep the last sentence in the opening paragraph.

4.     I have been on the site and this is a pretty good interpretation of how the site actually runs and gives out information

5.     Grammar check, maybe a little formatting with the first paragraph that’s about it.

Carter review:

1.     What is the original story, audience, and purpose? Whatis the new audience and / or purpose?

The original audience is prospective students for Brown or anybody looking where to go for college. The purpose is to inform readers that their [Brown College] has certain aspects few other colleges and if it interests you then go there. The new audience is the same people, but those who are opposed to the idea or basically think it is dumb.

2.     How is the change in audience and / or purpose reflected in the rewriting of the piece?

The change is used with the Barstool approach of summarizing the initial article and then voicing a specific opinion on the matter. The author does a good job of this by explaining the fashion he is going to take in changing the article. Then he does a good job of emphasizing his opinion about why it is dumb and giving examples of what the future might hold for similar situations.

3.     What is the single best thing that could be added to the introduction?

Grammar. There are a few grammatical errors that are easy fixes and can touch up the introduction to make it easier to read and more effective.

4.     In what other ways might the piece better target its new audience and / or purpose?

Maybe continue to use the questionnaire approach. An example would be to ask, are you really considering choosing a college because of a transgender operation you want done? Or if you disagree with this idea do you want to attend a college where your tuition is going to funding of transgender operations?

5.     Any additional comments?

I like the Barstool approach and Bryce does a good job of explaining as well as portraying it.

countering for real

Another aspect Harris describes in terms of writing is called “countering”. Like forwarding, countering is a way of keeping a conversation going. The idea of countering is that people are challenging an idea instead of taking the information and just recirculating it into another piece of writing. Countering occurs when someone has a different way of thinking about a certain article or fact. Harris describes it best when he says countering is not to “nullify” someone’s ideas but it “suggests and different way of thinking”. There are so many ways to look at a topic that there is no specific right or wrong, and that is what countering proves. I used countering in my last essay, when an author suggested that society was getting lazy with the improvement of technology, I countered that idea and suggested that society is just adapting to their surroundings.

Countering is a common thing to do in articles, blogs, tv, and any other source of news. It is all over the place. Some of the biggest examples can be seen in politics. One party may think lowering taxes will improve the economy while one party may think the opposite. Neither party is necessarily wrong but they just have different ideas on the same situation presented in front of them. Another topic that one can see countering in lately is on the topic of gun control. In this article http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/gun-control-constitution_b_2657841.html it questions whether or not the constitution restricts gun control. It is not saying that people are interpreting the constitution wrong, it is once again just another way to look at a piece of writing.