Soxbadger

Im concerned with people being shot, a criminal presupposes that they are actually guilty. As I said, innocent until proven guilty. You either believe in it fundamentally or you do not.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 04:25 PM) I would like it on the books that anyone who steps into their home and witnesses their 4 year old being molested by someone has the full, federal and state constitutionally protected right to take a shotgun and blow the guys head off. Hell, make it a mandate that that person is also guaranteed a town parade in his/her honor. That is not vigilante justice. If the Guardian Angels here in town wanted to arm themselves and start shooting any would-be criminal at CTA stations then you might have a point. It just sickens me so much that you guys are concerned with the well being of criminals. Yes, every once and a while there's an unfortunate situation, and hopefully the justice system will work out IF Martin was actually innocent. But that sort of unfortunate result happens all the time and we're ok with it. Police shoot innocent people daily. Why is that ok but private citizens making the same mistake, probably less frequently, such a huge deal? Once again, fundamental difference in belief. You believe that people should have the right to kill someone as judge, jury and executioner. I believe that all Americans, regardless of how heinous they are deserve a trial and are innocent until proven guilty. That is important to me, innocent until proven guilty. Why am I concerned with the well being of criminals? Its simple, if you protect the worst of society, if you give the worst rights, then you ensure everyone gets rights. Police shooting innocent people isnt okay, its not okay at all. But they are acting within their legal rights and humans are imperfect, so mistakes will happen. The entire point is that even the police, with all of their training, make mistakes, so its likely that non-trained civilians will also make mistakes.

Oh come on, its not about "safe" in that circumstance, its about whether as a society we allow regular people to take justice into their own hands. As much as I would love to say that people should be allowed to be vigilantes, it just isnt in society's best interest to have people acting like Judge Dredd.

I liked it when they were at the Multiplex.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:34 PM) Where is that found in the constitution? Article 9 and 10 9. Rule of construction of Constitution The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 10. Rights of the States under Constitution The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. So the Constitution never delegates the right for the govt to control what people eat or drink, thus it is a right that was reserved to the people. Also under 9, you can not argue that merely because it was left out, that it means the US govt has the power to restrict it. Its the same way you have to dissect the 2nd Amendment: Right to keep and bear arms 2. A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. You have to remove the first part of the clause because todays understanding has nothing to do with militias.

You always say that the defendant will testify, its to try and intimidate the witnesses. If they think their testimony will go without rebuttal they dont have to worry at all, if there is a chance Sandusky testifies, they have to be more careful with what they say. That being said, there is absolutely no way I put Sandusky on the stand. I just argue that these kids are all troubled and liars and that there motivation was fame/notoriety, whatever. Sandusky being cross examined would be the end. "So you put your head between his legs, right?" "So you were naked in the shower with him, right?" If he says no, he comes off as a liar, if he says yes, he just convicted himself. What can you really do? Unless hes going to go up there and just deny everything, if thats the case, might as well do it. But I cant imagine hell just flat out perjure everything.

There are no limits on gun ownership in the constitution. Arguably you should be able to buy a nuclear weapon. And gun rights is probably one of my bigger hypocritical issues, so I usually just use it as a tradeoff. Let me have my drug rights and you can have your gun rights.

Then why not legalize drugs too. Its the same idea, criminals are going to have them anyway, so why shouldnt the rest get to enjoy them.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:26 PM) I just don't think one should go get a $200k degree for a $35k/yr job when they can get the same education for half that price. I know some families can afford that, but many can't and yet students are still doing it. Well this one depends. I mean if you can go to Harvard, you go to Harvard. If you are talking about going to Wash U instead of instate U of I, unless your family is loaded your probably better off instate U of I. These werent questions I ever had concerns with, I refused to go to any school that didnt have a DI football team. I had priorities.

It doesnt matter to me. I dont even look at College degree on resumes, so for all I know they could have put down clown college. I just care what school they went to, if its Madison then obviously they are getting hired. Anywhere else, who cares.

You cant kill someone with a vote. The reason for the course isnt to deny someone the right to have a gun, its to make sure that they know how to use it. The better comparison would be that you have to pass an intelligence test to vote, which obviously is not allowed.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:22 PM) You seemed to be arguing earlier that the entire college "experience" is where the true value lies...if that is the case, why does it really matter what major you chose? Well it doesnt matter to me what degree you chose. It does matter to other people though, so if you take that into consideration, it may matter what major you decide.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:19 PM) No, Im asking them to at least go in a flexible major and have a GENERAL idea of what they want to do. I don't expect anyone to map out their career at the age of 18, college is a time to find out about yourself and your interests. By that I mean, major in English instead of Journalism, so you can teach, be an editor, etc compared to just be a journalist. If you get a history degree, know why you want one. Is it to improve writing and research skills? Is it because you want to teach? If you just have a passion for something, maybe it's best to have it as a second major or as a minor. You just have to realize not everyone is in it for the money. I would take very little money to do something that I have a passion for.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:18 PM) Exactly, so to bring my point back full circle, don't you see the problem with college now? That the entire economy is basically requiring that you get a piece of paper that's essentially pointless**? Why not push vocational schools which are essentially apprenticeships? Why don't employers view that as a positive? Laziness? Don't want to check into your job candidate, better to weed them out based on where they got a degree? I don't know, but that's where we're at. More "educated" but inexperienced people looking for jobs. **and yes, you obviously learn skills and other useful information in college. But a lot of that can be learned through internships/early jobs. But the problem is if you go that route you're limiting your future earning potential in 95% of cases. I completely agree, and I think simplest solution would be to slap employers and make them realize that a College degree isnt the end all be all. The problem is that College degree, Law degree and the Bar are great barriers of entry and prevent competition. If only people with Law degrees who pass the Bar can get my job, then I have a lot better job security than if you could just hire someone off the street. So until people stop being greedy bastards who are worried about #1, its unlikely that the system will ever change.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:14 PM) Fine, they can skip college and try the job market on their own then. I bet 99% of the people that go down that path will wish they went to college, even if part of it was a "waste" of time. Then if its such a smart decision, those who went to College shouldnt complain. I obviously made a conscious effort to get a College degree, so it stands to reason I believed that it was worth it. But if any of my friends started b****ing about going to College, Id really have little pity for them.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:13 PM) If I mocked your degree, I didn't mean too. I just don't like the shortsightedness that is rampant in HS'ers and college students, and the fact that this shortsightedness than tends to cost the public tons of money. I never said one can't go for a History degree, I just suggested that they shouldn't go to a $50k/yr private school for it if their family can't afford it. And they also shouldn't go into that degree unless they have a general understanding of what they can do with it afterwards. Not everyone can have concrete plans. You are asking 18 year olds to make life decisions before they truly are ready. That is the problem with how expensive College is, you cant just go there and find out, you really need to already have a plan, which is so counterproductive to the College experience.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:12 PM) Law schools is 100 times worse than college are preparing you for the real world. Nothing I learned in law school, except for abstract ideas, prepared me for anything I do on a day to day basis. There was no course like "how to present a motion in the circuit court of cook county." That's sorta my point here - learning some abstract ideas in college doesn't help with the day to day. With something like business you couldn't do that because there a million "business" jobs. But even lawyers, in a very specific profession, aren't well prepared coming out of school. School is almost secondary to that first clerk job you can get, and yet the entire industry requires you to have that degree. Why isn't it enough that I can teach myself and pass the bar and have the same clerk experience? Why do I have to shovel over 120k+ to get that piece of paper when I could have self-studied and taken the Bar/Bri course I paid for anyway and ended up in the same place? Law School is the biggest joke ever. With Bar Bri I could have passed the Bar in High School, and if I had just clerked/interned for the next 7 years I would have been amazingly more prepared on the first day of work.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:07 PM) I went to a top high school in Michigan, took many AP courses, and none of them prepared me for work like my business degree did. Yes, there are games you have to play such as knowing buzzwords, but that's for anybody trying to get a job today and the business degree just teaches students how to better adapt to these games. Mindless work? Really? The mindless work I do saves my company thousands of dollars a year, and keeps the company running as efficiently as possible. In case you haven't noticed, companies need that to turn a profit, and need a profit to hire people. And no, HS helped but it had NOWHERE near the amount of in-depth skill development that I learned in college. So you think your College degree was worth it, that is great news. That does not change the fact for many it is is not worth it, nor will it ever be.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 02:01 PM) Wow...you're coming off as an elitist cocksucker in this post. That was the point of the post. People can mock my History/Political Science degrees all they want, but the simple fact is, I chose to get the degrees I want and I make my own decisions, and I live with my own consequences. When things dont go right for me, I dont blame other people, I blame myself. No one is forced to go to College, but yet people want to force others in College to have to learn certain things so it makes their life easier. High School is already filled with that nonsense, requirements, etc. Its hard to feel sorry for people who made their own decisions and then dont want to take responsibility for where it got them. And it frustrates me to know that eventually College will become less of an intellectual challenge.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 01:46 PM) I'm not so certain. We allow police to have weapons and they have killed innocent people. Are you suggesting we should disarm them? I'm not certain that the public has any worse a track record than the police. In a perfect world no one would have guns, but you cant close Pandora's box. Id be more fine with people owning guns if they had to go through mandatory training.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) Geez, you get these jobs because you have advanced skills in certain areas compared to other people, such as presenting, analyzing, communicating, etc. These skills are worth lots of money. You mean you have skills that people learn in High School. Business degree is considered a joke by many. So once again, what real life skills should they have wasted my time with in College? Should they teach me to balance a check book, create a budget, tie my shoes? Those are things they taught me in elementary school. I went to College to be challenged, not to just use nonsense buzz words on my resume so I can get paid to mindlessly work. I learned to communicate, analyze and present?!?! Isnt that what they taught you in grade school? How to format an essay, how to present an argument, how to frame a debate? I just expect that people who are going to College already understand this.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 01:34 PM) Where? What other places provide the ability to make $55-70k at the age of 22? How is earning $55k-$70k at age 22 a real life skill?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 01:28 PM) Well, to be fair to those kids, they're being lied to. "Get a college education and your life is amazing" is the message, from teachers to the President. In reality, the education that students receive (for an insane amount of money) doesn't guarantee anyone that, and what's worse is that it barely prepares them for a future career. Specific education in specific fields should be how the system is set up, not a generalized post-high school education like we have now. Two of the most popular majors, Business and Political Science are 100% worthless in trying to get a job. Society is lying to people. This is not new, but trying to fix College to guarantee a job, is nothing more than the same repetitive lie. If there are X college graduates and Y jobs, it doesnt matter what you taught X if Y is less than the number. That is why the focus should be more on, "Is College really a good decision for you?" because College simply is not for everyone, at least not $20k+ a year college. So if College isnt really for you, maybe you get a cheap degree at a community college because getting a job and having experience, is often better than coming out of college with a fancy degree. QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 01:29 PM) Well, the problem is, like the last 6 Presidents have done nothing but tell everyone they need to strive to get a college education "to prepare them for the real world." You're acting as if this is the first time you've heard of this concept. So now everyone's been brainstormed that they must attend college otherwise they will be standing in line at the soup kitchen. Meanwhile, the cost of attending college has been shooting up for 25 years while wages have stagnated. I guess maybe the pendulum has just been swung a bit too far. Its not the first time Ive heard the concept, I just dont agree with the concept. So instead of coming here and keeping with the meme that everyone must go to the most expensive College, Im saying that we should reevaluate that. Maybe its not worth $100k over 4 years, maybe its really only worth $10k, so that should impact your decision where you go to College. I just dont see how you can realistically say that spending $100k to go to a vocational school is worth it, when youre probably better off just going to a job and offering to start at minimum wage.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 01:23 PM) I have absolutely no idea where you are going with this. Perhaps I was coddled too much? I dont know if you were coddled or not. Where I am going with this is people are saying that College should be more focused towards getting people jobs or real world skills, and Im saying there are plenty other places to learn that stuff, it shouldnt be in college. Seems straight forward to me.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 01:19 PM) I'm not really sure what you're arguing against... But we have a high school system that primarily prepares everyone to attend college when a good number either aren't interested, aren't intelligent enough, aren't willing or able to pay for college, or some combination of the three. So let's help those kids out too, by teaching them vocational skills instead of making them sit in an English Literature class they have absolutely no interest in. Well then that isnt about college, that is about High School which is entirely different as High School is mandatory where College is optional. I agree that students in High School should have much more freedom to chose what they want to do, and if they want to take mechanic/shop class or electrical etc, sure whatever. But if they want to take English Literature, even if they arent smart, they should get to do that as well. Im arguing against the idea that there should be more structure in College, that College should be more focused on preparing people for the real world. Do that on your own time, I didnt pay for that nonsense.