Commentary review Final blog stage

   I have reviewed one of classmates Jeniffer Silvia's article Taking Culture Wars to the Toilets . It was basically talking about the gender issue that can choose to use either male or female restroom .
After I read article that she posted, I could absolutely understand her argument and agree with it.
   The problem is not all transgenders are trustworthy to use restroom where they want to choose, no one can be sure what will be happened and many people would against on this issue. This is out of the equal right and can't really understand that they can chooose the restroom they want to. We have respectation and consideration on them, but obviously can't trust all of them. There is a possibility that Some of them may be dangerous and harm to other gender. If it's unlucky, this problem can go on criminal issue as we can guess. The male restroom and female restroom are existing for privacy on gender and not to distract to each other.
   We are not judging on this, but this can make people have uncomfortable feeling to use the restroom. It is just weird and should be out of the court house, so people don't have to worry. Not all of us would have same agreement, but basically "yes". It's not about to be against anti-person.  It just doesn't make sense that sharing restoom together. It is unpredictable that can make accident or inappropriate action in public restroom and people want to use safe restroom. As she said, The opposite way would be better that men born identity as women would have to use men's restroom. This is still weird and doesn't convince us ,but could think positive way that people can feel safe in public restroom.

(Blog Stage Seven)We oppose the campus carry.

    This article was blog stage five that I wrote before and want to make clear argument to refresh as Mr. Seago wants.  The article that we will discuss about is UT-Austin issuses campus carry rules barring guns from Dorms. This law is basically allow the concealed carrying the weapon in public university building by licensed holders.
    Author tells us the three conditions that we can carry the guns. Concealed handguns will be allowed in dorms' common areas; people who work in the dorms will be able to carry; and family members visiting the dorms will also be allowed to carry. This sound would be little bit threaten to students that can't be sure about their protection, because not all people agree with this new law and not all of them have licensed to carry the guns.
   The uncomfortable problem was choice to allow the guns in classroom. Members of the group Gun free UT, were upset about this choice. What is the reason for carrying the guns in classroom. What happen if there's is a shot accident in classroom, even we believe it won't be happen. Are they going to increase the strength for campus carry and make sure everyone to carry them?  The choice of law makes the UT being a gun place. Many people would be afraid of this issuse and have hard time to consider to go to school. They go to college to graduate and prepare for future job , not carry the gun to give threaten to someone. It gives big influence to people. If they see other people carry the gun in campus, they obvioously would carry guns to not have miserable life. It doesn't decrease any rate of crime that related to gun.
    This issuse can absolutely increase the rate of carrying guns in campus. I really want to oppose the campus carry. The law should be changed or find out different way . They could make protection put more polices and warning alarm to prevent the shot accident. We do not want to see any happen like murder or shot in the campus, even it's just deal for protecting themselves and carrying in case. No one know what would it be happened. This campus carry has been one of the most controversial issue for the college and there is a possibility that others like private college would get influence to make choice as UT does. This is issue can be huge that we can't imagine. It's meaningless and only pain of result will come to us. This law can be the source to develop the problem until people understand the cause of gun. After I re-read another article which is talking about campus carry, I repeat and claim again that I am againt on this rules.

Blog stage Six

I have read through Ms. Anne's post that she wrote about Gun Control: Open Carry. I understand that would rather choose to openly carry or conceal the weapon for our life and lives around us. Owning gun would be right to defend our selves whether it be visible or not as she said. It made me hard time to consider and think about it seriously. I could possibly agree on her argument.

However, I want to be on other side to claim as I brought the article about UT campus open carry. I want to say that we should not carry the gun even other people do, because basically people would get influence to carry the gun if other people do it around us. It becomes more threaten and care each other to defend their lives. I can see the state can be a war area like everyone owns gun. As many people carry the guns , the possibilty shot accident of rate would increase and can make the population decrease. It is unfair and not acceptable that everyone may take the guns to defend themselves. It would be better that block the gun carry to stop making gun accident. It's our choice that openly carry or not. I would like to people have a normal life , not a threaten life with a gun. Some people can strongly agree the open carry but some people don't as I don't. The open carry of rates can be decreased or stayed in small limit if we prefer not to do open carry. But I still respect the individual has the right to posses them. Just feel bad that It's being a threaten and uncomfortable if weapon is visible. The law should be changed to consider people and we better not follow to open carry, so can decrease the shot accident or other issue of innocent death.

Blog stage Five : students in UT are not carrying the gun to study.

Students or member of staff in UT,  we have probably heard about campus carry and open carry which mean generally only individual 21 or older may be licensed to carry the guns.
However for what? For studying safe and go to school without any problem? The campus would become as hunting or shooting place to shoot someone. This would make police to have less care about their responsibility to keep their area.

Campus carry basically means allow licensed holders to carry concealed handgun on UT campus , even not many holders would openly carry it on campus.
What about the open carry? It is pretty same as campus carry. Firearms holders can be allowed to carry weapons on campus.

I had wondered about if they can carry the guns in classroom.
UT austin had been allowed to carry the guns in classroom due to concerns have gun lockers on campus. If students take the guns in classroom, that's quietly threaten to everyone. Of course , they would not show their guns on purpose.

They didn't give information or certain reason to allow the guns on Campus. In outside of the school, it would be okay whoever is allowed to carry the gun , but it's different that studetns carry the guns in their school for what? This result of law from Texas makes more our state threaten area as a gun place. As more people carry guns with them, many of others would get influence to carry guns, too. Increasing rate would be naturally going high. It's just difficult , because all people are not same and not 100% trust that they would not shoot someone, just carrying in case. Other people from other countries to study in UT wouldn't get this issue and not acceptable to carry gun in studying place.
Although polices or guards aren't enough compare to UT's big magnitude, they are there for doing their jobs. Basically, allowing the hand-gun is the problem. Since it has been allowed to carry before make law about carrying the gun in UT, there are many gun accident in anywhere. We wouldn't want to students do it and don't want to tell people UT is dangerous place to carry guns.

Blog stage four

On March 2, the author Matthew Watkins has written article called " A&M President: Student Involved in Racist Incident No Longer On Campus" , has found this poster in Texas Tribune and talks about the racial slur incident. Author(Reporter) tries to say the main causation about the incident when it brought the racial problem between Texas A&M students and Texas at Austin high school students. Point is finding the truth. The beginning was started by Texas high school students who wore and a Texas A&M university of students involved in the harassment of a group of minority of the high school students touring the campus, according to announcement.  There was somthing racial slur that can make misunderstand each other. One of the students in university said to them "go back to where you came from" and "go to bonfire" when they noticed that high school students were wearing Texas at Austin backpack , by police report. Also that's what high school counselor heard when it happened.  Was it really happened on purpose as racism or misunderstanding communication ?

The female student who goes to A&M univerisity students said , it could be a misunderstanding ,because both group were talking and could have been music playing ,too. It was like an unsure answer either avoid the issue or tell truth. Another issue to say from Young, this is not the only one incident . There could be a possibility to be happened on the other campuses. The racial slur is purpose to make feel them embarrased. If that was a misunderstanding or different purpose , It should be resolved well . All people who live in Texas , are being equal to live as well and related about the game like a football , they don't have to be emotional to give racial slur or other ways to be jerk on them.

It is an unacceptable that there are racism to make the problem and hurts someone's feeling, even they don't really face criminal chrages. Although the female student's interview wasn't cleary answered for the incident about racial slur to high school students , it is good to believe that was misunderstanding in the situation. It just can make the college or high school as bad criticism with racial problem, so it doesn't have to be made up with bad news.

blog stage three

The article is about no place for old man, and author Dick J. Reavis titled "Texas prisons are filling up with the old and the ill — at enormous expense." The author made argument about State of Texas prison about holding old men, because state is operating 109 prisons holding about 148,000 immates and 27000 of them are like old men who are the over age of 50 and cared to protect their health to be safe. Whatever they did in the past, they are medicared for their health to live. One old man had hard time with prostate cancer and he was medicared by imprisonment. If they are in the prison with ill, they are free to get medicared, whatever they want to or not. The reason that they their health and safety were protected was federal courts have ruled that and Texas will have to pay for them. They care about the health for prisoner to be safe. In the law, there was possiblity that to have medical parole for people who are older than 60. It's really hard to think about it and this is big one that which way we should think. Prisoners are there by something wrong or sometimes innocent people are there. Their healths are cared by government pay for it. Author may think they should get medicare in hospital, not in prison. I am not really on his thought, because they are in prison to get judge. However, any person's health for life is important. I agree with that, but what State can do for normal people who have health problem without money. Should they go prison in old age and get medicare?  This is what I want to say in personal opinion.  Many people who are normal citizens lose their life in everyday of life, but how they focus to care prisoners for health more than people who are sick and have no money to care themselves. If Texas pay medicare for immates in prisons, they should make deal with something to them, because they are prisoners, even they have health problem. Also, one more thing to add, should try to pay for people who doesn't have money for healthcare, too. This is my opinion that isn't showed in this article.

Blog stage Two

The article After Planned Parenthood Ouster, More Medicaid Births and Less Birth Control was posted by Jen Reel. The Texas women's health program was released after anti-abortion Texas lawmakers blocked plan to parenthood. It tries to increase the people get more medicaid. In Texas more than half of all births are covered by medicaid and those more than half of all births are the reported result of unplanned pregnancy. This can be unsafety births and no plan for family care. State health officials and family planning providers continue working to redesign for state's reproductive safety health. For planned parenthood the health care such as medicaid is pretty important to imply, but the program in state ban planned parenthood from participation. Even they have planned parenthood, the program wouldn't be successful well.
Many women can be confused about the health care program and government should help this to women how the program works and why does it need to them. It will make them more joinable and show the possibility to decrease the abortion. The planned parenthood should be worked without payment for fair, so it should be more focused and all women should be available to find provider to get help. The planned parenhood shouldn't be banned ,because unplanned births and the abortion of rates wouldn't be changed.