Peculiar Institution

This book was very interesting. I learned a great deal about the death penalty during my time as a debate captain in high school however I had never looked at it from this point of view. I agreed most with what Garland says at the very end of the book:

“The system of capital punishment that exists in America today is primarily a communication system. For the most part the system is not about executions, which, outside of Texas and a few Southern states, are relatively rare- more people are killed each year by lightning. It is about mounting campaigns, taking polls, passing laws, bringing charges, bargaining pleas, imposing sentences, and rehearing cases.” (Pg. 312)

While I personally am in favor of the death penalty in certain circumstances, I believe his opinion that much of the death penalty is political for most of the country is correct. He also states that “individuals are regarded as sacred” (pg. 306) showing how contradicting having the death penalty is. The demand for revenge is often part of why criminals are sentenced to death. However, how can the death penalty be considered a deterrent when those sentenced to death are on death row for years on end? If the criminal is old enough they will die of natural causes before they finish appeals. The book shows the issues behind the question of the death penalty without venturing into the moral aspect; it looks at the issue from the factual perspective.

*Essential Question Response: Who should decide the issue of capital punishment?

I’m not sure I’m the one to decide who is able to make the decision of who dies and who lives. Whether or not a crime is bad enough to deserve death is a subjective decision. I do not believe it should be decided only by one judge. If I had to decide, I believe it should be suggested by the jury and confirmed by a separate panel after examining the evidence and court transcripts.

All The Devils Are Here

First let me say I have never been overly great at economics which made this book more than a bit confusing. Because my father works in the financial world this book hit close to home for me. It’s terrifying that so many people tried to speak up and tell everyone that problems were coming. How could they have been ignored?

As I continued to read the book, I noted there were quite a few occasions where the entire financial crisis could have been stopped. For example, Robert Gnzizda started meeting with Alan Greenspan in the early 1990’s saying “Let’s look at the unregulated lenders.” (pg. 86) Edward Gramlich, was asked by Greenspan to head up the Fed’s committee on consumer and community affairs. After learning about the subprime mortgage problem, he wrote the book Subprime Mortgages: America’s Latest Boom and Bust. The book was published over a decade before the economy fell. These are just two of the people who tried to warn the government and the people about what was going on. But for this to all happen it required a perfect storm in that each party and event played its part in creating the crisis. It was not only the mortgages that were such a problem. There was bundling the mortgages, lowering the interest rate, changing legislation, and much more. If this is possible, what else are we not listening to?

Hopefully the financial crisis will make Americans look at things differently. If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

Discussion Question Response:

What are your views on homeownership? Do you think that every American should be able to own a home, is it a sign of success, do you own a home?

I believe that if someone has the financial ability to own a home, they should have that option. However, if they do not have the financial stability to be able to handle that type of debt and responsibility then no I don’t believe they have an absolute right to own a home. While it is seen as the American dream to own a home, I think the American dream needs to change given the current economic situation. In a place like New York it is not looked down upon to rent your home. Why is it ok in a place like that but looked at differently in other areas of the country? I don’t see why it should be looked at any differently.

Week 1 Response

Response to Kelly

I believe the use of “Committed Impartiality” should be adopted in classrooms because it is an essential way for students to form and express their own opinions while still giving teachers the ability to handle sensitive and controversial topics in the classroom. By teaching these controversial topics in the classroom, it gives students a safe place to learn about different topics and learn how to handle opinions that may differ from their own.

When a teacher uses exclusive partiality, it can affect a student’s opinion. Students are forced to view only one side of an argument, which can enforce the student’s opinion or can force them to not discuss their opinion because it might be contrary to the teacher and others in the class.

Response to Passe and Evans

            In this reading, it is stressed that classroom discussion of controversial topics “can be instrumental in student growth and, ultimately, in the development of democratic citizens.” (pg 81) By not discussing these topics, intolerance and shallowness can be reinforced if they are being taught at home. However, the teacher’s treatment of those topics is incredibly important. The teacher must create an environment where students respect each other and their opinions. If the teacher creates an environment where ground rules are enforced and topics are chosen carefully, students can grow mentally. The teacher must be careful to keep students on the right path during the conversation so no student gets verbally attacked for an opinion. They must also remain neutral yet guiding in how they handle the discussion. Passe and Evans also discuss ways for the teacher to create a positive environment for the discussion. If the teacher can create that environment, students should be able to better handle the topics. Hopefully those discussions should help students learn more about problem solving and expressing their opinion in a positive manner.