Crime & Punishment

    In the article Crime & Punishment in the New York Times magazine Patricia Smith quoted that "The Supreme Court recently struck down mandatory sentences of life without parole for juveniles. The ruling signals a shift in how the law treats young offenders." One prisoner that committed a crime when he was 14 years old is Dominic Culpepper. At the age of 14 Dominic beat a neighbor to death with a baseball bat and is now serving at Florida State Prison. Another prisoner Rebecca Falcon took part of murder when she was 15. Rebecca got drunk and took back a huge amount of whiskey and got in a cab with her friend, who was 18 years old. Her friend had a gun then a few minutes later the cab driver was dead on the ground. Rebecca has life in prison just like Dominic. But now Supreme Court judges start to second guess about how younger teens who commit crimes should have a second chance and they should have life without parole. 

    Criminal Justice Legal Foundation Kent Scheidegger said that, "There are some truly horrible crimes committed by 17-year-olds, and those crimes deserve life without parole." To me this means that judges are letting teens that have committed a crime slide and not have to do a lifetime of parole. When judges let teens out of jail you never know what would be the next thing that they do. If teens continue to do things like that and get away with it teens would go crazy and just would be all over the place. But there are places that teens can go when they commit a crime. It's like jail but it's for younger ages Teens and children are what make up half of this world so this world would be destroyed if teens could continue to get out of jail. 

Is Valentines Day True Love??

   In the article "Historically Incorrect Canoodling" by Stephanie Coontz from New York Times she describes how Valentines Day really wasn't for couples being together and being romantic. . Also, in the article marriage horrified people who invented Valentines Day. It was for people not to be in love, married and to have sex. Stephanie says in the article that even when people were married the really couldn't have sex. If they did it had to not pleasurable and sex only was if you wanted to have kids. But now people use Valentines Day as a romance movie. Where they go to the movies, going on dates, cuddling and etc. When back then Valentine's Day was invented for people not to be in love but to not do any type of Valentines Day activity. 

 My opinion is that Valentines Day should go back to being people not in love like before because I personally i don't like Valentines Day. But then again you still have family on Valentines Day that you can love and cherish just for being there in your life. Another thing is there are other people who still are in love and would be in love no matter what anyone says, so you can't really do anything about it.  

Then you have a bad side to this situation because on Valentines Day young people lose their virginity and then the next day the person might leave then your alone. So you really have to watch out for who you're with on Valentines Day.That was the only good thing about back in the day that people couldn't do things like that on Valentines Day and they would play it safe.

Unveiling Europe

    In the article "Unveiling Europe" by Veronica Majerol explains that in France there is an new law that forbids covering one's face in public. For most religious women it affected an estimate of 2,000 French Muslim women. One women named Hind Ahmas , 33, has broken the law more than she can count. She broken the law because she wears her Niqab which is a head-to-toe veil that only has a slit to see out of. If women had to do this all over the world them their would be plenty of people getting fines...everyday. It's a women's constitutional right to wear her veil anywhere at anytime. In the article Veronica Majerol explains that veils in the U.S. is a Florida judge ruled in 2003 that a Muslim woman had to remove her nijab for a driver's license photo. 

   There also are other places that have a local prohibitions on veils. Places like Italy, Spain, Austria, Switzerland, Great Britain, and Denmark. Marco Perolini, at Amnesty's London office said "This is an issue relating to the right of freedom of expression in general." He says the ban also infringes on women's freedoms of speech and belief. 

   I think that it's bad to have a policy on whether or not women can wear their veils. If it's their religion they should be able to wear their veil. But their are pro's and con's to this situation. A few pro's are women wear their veils because it's their religion it's almost like breaking their laws when they take their veils off. There are many more con's than you think. For example, little girl that just got found in January after being kidnapped. There was a women that had a veil in that kidnapped her..what if she wasn't really Muslim and just had the veil to get the little girl. Then when people rob stores or banks then it could really be a man in a veil that just put a veil on so no one can get his identity. You never know. Going out in public with a veil or Niqab on can be a good thing but then again a bad thing.