December 2008 Archives

I am writing this letter to express my concern for police officer safety within the York County region. It is unnerving to witness how these officers conduct themselves while monitoring an individual that has been placed under arrest.

Police officers will allow these individuals to be taken out of their handcuffs and will expose their "gun side" to them while remaining oblivious to the fact that a volatile individual is now unrestrained, it is astonishing how these officers turn their backs on these individuals while they are unrestrained when at anytime these individuals can attempt to flee or attack the officer. I believe that officer safety is extremely important and it has been my experience that many officers seem to lack this training or feel that they are invincible. If a dangerous individual that they have capture is able to escape and further elude police they pose a threat to the safety of citizens.

Another aspect regarding the law enforcement agencies in this area is practices of traffic enforcement. There are many areas throughout York County, Pennsylvania that are notorious for winding roads and poor road construction. All of these factors contribute to the unsafe situations that law enforcement officers place themselves and other motorists in while performing the functions of their jobs. A traffic stop is one of the most dangerous duties that law enforcement officers will encounter during their careers. The risk level is compounded when these officers make traffic stops on poorly lit and marked roads. I am not saying that these officers should not conduct traffic stops at night; however they should not stop a vehicle in the middle of the lane of travel around a bend or over the crest of a hill.

Matthew Zaryk
York College of Pennsylvania

I am a Junior at York College concerned about Barack Obama's stance on gun control. With the nomination of president elect Barack Obama, many Americans including my self, are experiencing a growing concern for their right to bear arms. Since the conclusion of this year's election firearm and ammunitions sales have dramatically increased. The underlying factor for such an increase is notion that Obama will implement a 500% tax on ammunition and a ban on all semi automatic weapons.

Banning semi automatic weapons will bring an end to the recreational activates thousands enjoy such as hunting and target shooting. Obama's gun control plan strives to achieve a safer America by taking firearms out of the hands of criminals. However, such a plan punishes law abiding citizens in that it essentially strips one of their second amendment right to bear arms. To take away or obstruct a person's rights because of the criminal acts of others in the past is simply unjust.

Derek Bernard
York College of Pennsylvania

The issue of bailing out General Motors, Chrysler and Ford with a 15 million dollars bailout is not going to settle anything. These companies need to define what the problem is and the people in charge should be responsible for this. While these car companies are constantly laying people off, the heads of each are comfortably sitting on their thick wallets. If this bailout passes then who's to say that it will even solve anything. This is not new news that these companies are doing poorly. They should have fixed the problem a long time ago. It should not be our job to bail them out and put our nation in more debt than it is currently.

The one problem that many are worried about, and I believe is why this bill is not being laughed at, is the loss of jobs. These companies should be given some relief so that millions don't lose their job, but I feel that they should be carefully observed. I do not feel that they should just be given a handout and set on their way without any future plans to fix the problem. They should be given money every so often and then checked up on to make sure that changes are being made. If no substantial changes are made then each year the government will have to keep giving them money. Which leaves me to wonder, when will it stop? I feel for the families that are scared of losing their jobs and that is the only reason I feel these companies should be helped at all.

Alex Trostle
York College of Pennsylvania

The current crisis in our country involving the economic decline is a very serious issue concerning not only businesses and the stock market, but college students as well. Every year, college tuition increases, and schools which were once considered "affordable" are now becoming heavier on the change purse. Although the economic crisis has not yet affected colleges and universities on a financial level, it is expected to apply some pressure to these institutions in the following years. It seems very predictable that with the issues in the economy and the higher rate of inflation, future tuition rates could soar. This may threaten to put higher education out of reach for many Americans, and now not only low SAT scores are keeping students from going to college.

Nuclear sustainability is one of the many topics of environmental protection that is being discussed today. One might ask what nuclear sustainability is exactly. Sustainability is the goal of a practice or method that provides some sort of service without causing harm to the environment in the long run.

There is enough nuclear fuel dispersed, whether it's the 3.851 million metric tons that we know of or the 11 million metric tons still out there, around the world at this time to last 200 years. 40 times that if the plans and production of breeder reactors are completed and switched on. The breeder reactors convert used fuels from nuclear reactors and convert them into reusable fuels.

There are few minor environmental problems with nuclear power. There are very low particle emissions from reactors and the only major threat are thermal emissions. These can be easily avoided with the addition of a closed loop cooling system. Nuclear is one of the choices that we can make to keep this planet going, even if for just a little longer.

Chris Grothe
York College of Pennsylvania

While the news media fixates on the corruption charges against the man in charge of selecting the President-elect's replacement in the U.S. Senate, the crucial story slinks through the shadows unnoticed.

At stake if Gov. Rod Blagojevich, D-Ill., is guilty of selling Barack Obama's old post is one vote in the senate, one vote that almost certainly will contribute to the Democratic majority. At stake if Blagojevich is guilty of dangling a large sum of money over the head of a major news organization, available only if they fire those who have written against the governor, at stake is the integrity of the press nationwide.

Blagojevich threatened to withhold at least $100 million of state funds from the Tribune company to be granted only if it would fire editors "responsible for editorials critical of Blagojevich," according to the official criminal complaint filed by FBI Special Agent Daniel Cain.

Some say journalism is dead. Others say it's just in a coma. If at least the latter is true, the murderer of journalism won't only be uninhibited bias but also censorship of dissent. Nonviolent dissent is the principle reason that newspapers and other news media exist. Sure, media outlets also serve to inform and entertain. But their most important duty -- indeed their highest moral calling -- is to serve as government watchdog, to exercise the freedom to publish the truth regardless of whether it offends the powers that be.

And Blagojevich is just one man. One governor of 50 and one statesman of many more. If this one man, governor and statesman allegedly committed this act and got caught, how many more are manipulating the press and getting away with it?

Auctioning off a senate seat to the highest bidder: Despicable? Yes. Damaging to the integrity of the Illinois government? Absolutely. Significant in the long run? Not so much. Most of the time, a Democrat vote will be a Democrat vote. Surprising? Not at all. These are politicians we're talking about here.

Attempting to bribe the second largest newspaper publisher in the country in order to censor critical speech: Shameful? Yes. Threatening to the entire field of journalism? Absolutely. An affront on the freedom and values of every American? Without a doubt, 100 percent, yes.

When nuclei split, this is called fission and this is how nuclear energy is derived - from the splitting of Uranium-235. The waste product of Uranium splitting is Plutonium-239; which is a hazardous waste. Let's make a comparison. When at home, trash gets thrown away in the trash can; well, in this case Plutonium is a radioactive waste product whose decay is measured by its half-life. The half-life of plutonium is 24,000 years. However, after 24,000 years Plutonium is still hazardous. Plutonium becomes safe to handle after 240,000 years.

It should also be mentioned that there were 441 nuclear reactors in the world as of February 2002 and just one reactor - yes, one reactor - produces 20 to 30 tons of waste in one year. Just since 2002, that is roughly 66,150 tons of nuclear waste. I do not know about you readers out there but that means that we have to store 66 thousand tons of waste for 240 thousand years and each year that amount of storage increases. However, unlike with trash where it goes to trash dumps, there is no safe way to store nuclear waste. Each nuclear facility stores their waste on site. So, what happens in 100 years? Where will that waste be stored?

While there are no air pollutants and very little CO2 emissions, there are other renewable energy sources that do not have waste products that can be used. For example - wind, solar and water. While each of these energy sources require that the wind be blowing, the sun be shining and water to be flowing, at any given point anywhere around the world, at least one of these energy sources is occurring and can be harnessed. There needs to be a truly safe storage system implemented in order to safely store the waste.

Jason Burns
York College of Pennsylvania

I wanted to write about the reasons why the drinking age should be sustained at twenty-one. In college, we work to build a strong future for ourselves, but our focus has seemed to drift off into making drinking a priority. Lowering the drinking age would undo years of hard work in stopping the underage, and go against everything Mothers Against Drunk Driving continue to fight for. In regards to the Amethyst Initiative for Choosing Responsibilitiy, it sounds good, but there are holes in its theory. By allowing an eighteen year old to drink, the first thought on the mind will not be "drink responsibly." We cannot accept a proposal for a law promoting the acceptance of an eighteen year old driving drunk. We need to stop putting down our country and hold pride in ourselves. The United States has the highest drinking age due to awareness of the addictiveness of alcohol. Statistics show the younger a person starts drinking increases chances of developing alcohol dependence or abuse some time in their life. We need to believe in ourselves and the sanctity of the law.

Michelle Mangaro
York College of Pennsylvania

The article written by Cal Thomas titled, "Annie-one for a little optimism" caught my eye recently. He talks about our country being more positive about the economic crisis. How are we supposed to be more positive about loosing money and businesses going down? Yes we are the world's most powerful country but even if we're more positive we're not going to come out of the crisis by putting a smile on our faces. We will have to work hard to get back to where we were and then we can be positive.

Money doesn't buy happiness and people should be happy with the things they have, like their lives and their families, but it's going to be difficult until we as a nation are back on our feet.

What I got from the article is that he feels that if we sing, "The sun will come out tomorrow" that everything will magically be ok. The fact is that we're having a financial crisis and people don't typically like to lose their hard earned money or their jobs as some businesses start to close so they may be angry about it, and singing happy songs and pretending everything is ok isn't going to make it better. We do need to pull together as a nation to help ourselves out but being fake about it and putting on a good show isn't the way to do it.

Amanda Rosengrant
York College of Pennsylvania

Abortion is a huge issue today especially now with a new President-Elect that is so Pro-choice. Obama's views on abortion have stirred up some controversy especially among the Christian groups. Those groups such as the Evangelical Christians believe he is not a true Christian because of his stance on this big issue. I believe that he is trying to do the best for the country.

In my opinion abortion should be legal in the United States but should be restricted, also because of the court decision Roe v. Wade stated it would violate the privacy clause of the 14th amendment. Late term abortions should be restricted and should not be used unless for dire need.

Being a Catholic I can see both of the sides of the controversy, but with restrictions on abortion I believe we can find middle ground. Abortions are able to help those who are not able to carry a baby full term without the mother themselves dying or being injured for life, it will help rape victims and also those who cannot support a baby themselves whether they have a disability or horrible living conditions.

I do trust that adoption should also be more advertized because the rate of abortions may drop. Adoption is one step in finding the middle ground between the Pro-choice and Pro-life groups which should be found in the country that in the past has used compromises to make the United States as strong and free as it is today.

Sarah Spanarkel
York College of Pennsylvania

Congress will be voting shortly on a proposed $15 billion bailout for the Big 3 automakers. The result ought to be a resounding no. If the government saves the heavyweights of the auto industry, how can they say no to industry leaders that get in trouble in other markets?

The scope of the failure of the auto industry clearly extends beyond that of the Big 3, affecting over 3 million workers in various industries. The void created will have a negative effect on a lot of Americans. Unemployment will rise. People will struggle to cope.

Yet, such is the American way. Our risk/reward capitalist system holds a caveat. Risk. Everybody doesn't win in America. Companies have to innovate to stay ahead. It's why we have HD-TVs. Viagra. Laptops. It's why encyclopedias and VHS tapes are nearing extinction. Likewise, the downfall of domestic car companies allows for emerging domestic auto manufacturers to rise from the ashes with a fresh perspective and better products. These new companies will also create jobs as they expand; employing those who would have been laid off.

Capitalism is a primary reason why we defeated the U.S.S.R. during the Cold War. Why should the government start adapting Soviet-esque socialist practices? Why should the taxpayers give the automakers more money to mismanage and keep the auto industry stale? Instead, we should be patient. Yes, the short-term outlook appears bleak. However, we should not be as shortsighted as the executives at Ford, GM, and Chrysler and realize that failure now is the better long-term solution.

Tom Werner
York College of Pennsylvania

Gun violence is a big issue in our everyday lives, no matter where you live, but growing up outside of our nation's capitol, Washington D.C. I noticed the crime a lot more often than most people did. I do support gun control to an extent; however it should not be banned because the second amendment does give the people the right to bear arms.

Washington D.C recently changed their gun laws to allowing people to own a gun in their homes, but not to carry. I believe that although crime rate has increased because of this, it will soon decrease. This is a big step for our nation's capitol, which has one of the strictest gun laws in our nation, but also one of the highest crime rates as well. If people were allowed to have carry permits in D.C, I believe that too would be beneficial, however precautions should be taken.

There needs to be background checks and tougher regulations on who can purchase guns all over the country. York City is actually proposing a law after the New Year, which will require gun owners to report their missing guns within a certain period of time. This is a law that I feel would benefit in any city to a certain degree, because then maybe some gun violence would decrease. Essentially, guns need to be monitored, but not removed from the people who are not using them for the wrong reasons. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Jen Traxler
York College of Pennsylvania

As a conservative I have often wondered, what exactly is on the other side of the aisle. I often feel silly, almost childish that if I look hard enough, my deepest fears might just crystallize. That maybe a Stalin or Lenin might be looking back at me with their evil little eyes. I know this is not the truth, but I still can not help but wonder. I also wonder what they, those on the left, fear they might see on the other side; do they fear they might see Hitler or Ayatollah Ali Khamenei starring back at them.

It seems that even with education and an ardent digestion of philosophical literature and current events we still sometimes fear the worst, even though we should know better. Maybe the closer we look at those evil monsters, the more we realize that they were just shadows of gossip and speculation and that were not that different after all. We all get frustrated with the other side, but we both become frustrated with our own side as well at times.

In reality we are very similar when taken the time to pull our head up and scan around the globe and though-out history. Even the polar opposites, the Hitlers and the Stalins, at times look the same. Their political ideologies were complete opposite, but in the end had many similar results. The radicals are what they are, radicals; and all of us, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are what is left in the middle, the guardians of what Locke, Rousseau, and Smith referred to as classical liberalism, social contracts, and free markets, the pillars of American political ideology.

This student would like to believe, that even with our internal differences, our eternal similarities will stand.

Dominic Cole
York College of Pennsylvania

I am a junior at York College. Most of my life I have been impressed by the importance of responsibility to society and the individuals around me. I am aware of how my actions reflect on others and society as a whole. So what am I to think when I see Wall Street investors and corporate officers being awarded public funds for their seeming lack of community and social concern? When they make the right (money making) business decisions, they are rewarded. When they make the wrong (money loosing) business decisions, they are also rewarded by the taxpayer.

I don't suspect the individuals involved are inherently bad people. They have families, pay taxes, and live in and contribute to their chosen community just like the rest of us. Perhaps it is not the individual but the system that breeds this social irresponsibility. I do not think that the system needs to be turned upside but maybe the system should review its lack of irresponsibility to the individual. Should it really take a sit-in at a vinyl window making plant in Illinois for people to receive what they were contracted to do? Is it necessary for someone to die from not having heat in their home during winter because they work and still could not pay the public utility the going rate to make a profit for its share-holders?

No system is perfect. It seems too easy to put a label on someone who disagrees with the system. It's too easy to dismiss an individual because they recognize inequality is too much of a price to pay to perpetuate a system that no longer works quite right.

Megan Barley
York College of Pennsylvania

As global warming continues to instill fear in many people, America is on the right track in preventing future climate change. President Barack Obama's environmental policy plan of a market-based cap-and-trade system seems to be a logical and possible solution.

When the Clean Air Act of 1990 was in effect, a cap-and-trade system was designed to reduce sulfur emissions, which cause acid rain. As a result, sulfur emissions were reduced 22% lower than the mandated levels. By having this history as a perfect example of how a cap-and-trade system can work.

A cap-and-trade system is necessary in reducing the world's newest environmental concern--carbon emissions. America should be excited for a cleaner environment, and having a helping hand in the process.

Nicole Widger
York College of Pennsylvania

An 18-month FDIC survey shows that banks are making $17.5 billion every year on overdraft fees, 74 percent of their service charges, according to USA Today. With most banks, if you overdraw via check, ATM or debit card transactions, you are hit with a fee of about $35 for each purchase. Also, young and low-income people consumers disproportionately incur the fees.

Oh no! shouts the angry mob. How dare they persecute people who are struggling, especially in today's economy! If people overdraw their accounts, it's usually because they have to do so in order to put food on the table. This is just one more case of the big guy exploiting the little guy!

Hold the phone, angry mob. Put down your pitchforks. Don't go lighting your torches just yet. Let's look at what really happens when people overdraw their accounts and receive the resultant fee.

• They are spending money that belongs to the bank, not themselves.
• They are violating the bank's contract--that all involved parties signed-- which explicitly states that doing so will incur a fee.

If they signed the contract thereby consenting to the fee, it can't be exploitative. Can a person exploit oneself? Of course not. It can't get any simpler.

But no! the angry mob protests, The banks make it so hard to track the status of an account, leading to more overdraft fees!

Well, yes, but we know this, so we can take it into account. And most large banks process larger transactions before smaller ones, increasing the likelihood of multiple fees. But the reason for this is so that, as USAToday.com user candice23 so eloquently said: "your mortgage, rent, car payment and grocery bill get paid before your cigarettes and your Slurpees."

What's lacking here isn't a decree from a regulatory body, as others have suggested. It's personal responsibility. Angry mob, you signed a contract of your own free will consenting to overdraft fees. Regardless of the reason for an overdraft, you have to accept fault for the consequences.

Common sense dictates: don't spend money that you don't have. Maybe, just maybe, if the angry mob learns this maxim, it will start to catch on with corporations or the government.

Cell phones. Text messages. These are dirty words, say some, marking the end of the telephone. A phone is a phone. It isn't a camera, a navigational device or any other of those high tech things that computer whizzes are cooking up these days.

"Why don't you just call a person?" asks my dad in response to text messaging, a tinge of his New York accent still lingering.

Texting is more ubiquitous than the Beatles in the '60s, more than teased hair in the '80s, more than Uggs this season. Americans paid $70 billion--more than three times as much as the year's Hollywood ticket sales--in text messaging fees in 2005, according to an NPR report.

And there's good news: it's starting to pay off. In one case, a text message alert system prevented students of Hope College in Holland, Mich. from succumbing to a norovirus outbreak. The mass text message sent instructions to the college's 3,600 students, telling them what they could do to avoid spreading the virus.

And in another, more remarkable case, a doctor in the Democratic Republic of Congo successfully performed an arm amputation last month aided by his colleague via text message. David Nott had never performed the forequarter amputation, in which the collar bone and shoulder blade are removed, that a 16-year-old shooting victim needed.

"So he did what all of us do when faced with a tricky situation," Asylum blogger Matt Glazebrook wrote. "He texted a friend." Citing the operation's apparent success, Glazebrook went so far as to suggest the last text message in Nott's dialogue was probably a smiley emoticon.

The ever expanding utility of these devices and features used to be considered a luxury. It's no wonder that telecommunications thrive all over the world, even in the Democratic Republic of Congo, even in lawless and pirate-ridden Somalia. Cell phones and text messaging are here for better or for worse. And with more stories like these, it just might be for better.