This is the Real Deal

1)What is your opinion on concealed weapons being allowed on college campuses? Would you mind if students in your class were carrying guns? How do your personal background and beliefs influence your answer

I think that that allowing concealed weapons on college campuses has its pros and cons. I can not say that allowing students to have concealed weapons on campus would be a horrible idea because it could in fact be beneficial to a certain extent. If something severe were to ever occur at a college campus such as the tragic Virginia Tech massacre, the student or students would be more prepared in this kind of scenario. These students/faculty could potentially decrease the amount of victims that do get injured by using their weapons at the appropriate times. Although, I must admit that I wouldn’t feel so comfortable with having my fellow classmates carry guns around. Even though I am an indigenous American my father was from Palestine. In Palestine there is not a single soul that doesn’t carry concealed weapons on them, and that is why you never know what you could encounter. It is a scary feeling of everlasting fear and apprehension that I’d like to avoid if I can.

2) If guns were allowed on the George Mason campus, what criteria would you want met before the student would be allowed to carry a gun?

I would want an extensive background check on everyone. Anyone who has been convicted of a felony or has a record of misdemeanor should not be permitted to carry a concealed weapon and not even allowed to apply for one. I think anyone responsible college student with a clean record should be eligible to “apply” for a weapon.

3. Using the materials I have provided, what are the strongest arguments in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus? The weakest? Cite specific examples.

I think the strongest argument in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus is David Seelly’s testimony. David graduated from University of Utah and use to carry a concealed weapon on him. He said: "And not just shootings, but [serial killer] Ted Bundy did some of his crimes at the University of Utah campus". (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). This shows the fear that these students are living in. It also demonstrates how these students have no means of protecting themselves and it frightens them.

The weakest argument in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus would be Casey Matheny’s statement, "I would just keep [them] in my car for target shooting." (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). If Casey keeps his guns in his car what good would that do in protecting him or his classmates? He would never have the time to run out of class and quickly go to his car and get his gun if somebody bombarded his classroom. By that time God knows how many students would have been dead already. It doesn’t make sense to keep the gun in the car. Either you have it on you at all times so you can be prepared for worst case scenarios or you don’t carry one at all.

4. What are the strongest arguments in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus? The weakest? Cite specific examples from your own research.

The strongest argument in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus in my opinion is one of the students testimony. She says: “"I feel less safe knowing that a stranger sitting beside me in class may have a gun in his or her backpack” (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). This shows that students are going to live in fear no matter what the case is. If they get to carry concealed weapons on campus they are still scared of what others will do. If they don’t have any means of protecting themselves they are still scared.

The weakest argument in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus in my opinion would have to be Amanda Covington statement, “We are worried that it may affect their [students' and teachers'] willingness or desire to go to or teach a class on campus," (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). Although Amanda makes a valid point I think she fails to look at the bigger picture. These teachers are getting paid to teach, and these students are paying to come to school. Whether you decide to show up or not, that is not going to prevent a maniac from putting every student at gun point.

5. Should teachers be allowed to carry, but not students? Why or why not?

No, students and teachers should be allowed. What would happen if the shooter just happened to attack a class right after the teacher stepped out to get a drink or use the bathroom? That is not fair. Everyone should have the right to depend and protect themselves in all cases.6. Do some research on the Second Amendment. What are the predominant interpretations of it? In your answer, note whose interpretation you are referencing (for example, did the interpretation appear on the National Rifle Association website?).
The Second Amendment ambiguously states, “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.” (answers.com). These words have struck substantial controversy concerning the ongoing debate over gun control. Some say that the amendment was meant to protect the rights of states to maintain militia units. Other opponents say that it was intended to protect an individual right. This is the interpretation from answers.com.


7. In making the decision about whether to allow concealed carry weapons on campus, what factors other than the Second Amendment need to be considered? Or, is the Second Amendment sufficient reason to allow students to carry concealed weapons?

Since the Second Amendment tends to be ambiguous in the sense that many people interpret it in their own ways, I think that there she be a “friendly amendment” attached to the Second Amendment clarifying that every individual is entitled to defend themselves at all places and at all times. This way we can put a stop to all the different interpretations and we can stop running into trouble.

My Time To Shine

Song title: “You are Not Alone There’s a Way Out”
Genre: Country
Explanation: This song elaborates on the obesity epidemic in our nation. The song comforts overweight people using phrases like “you are not alone” and “there is a way out.” The country tone of it will give the listeners a compassionate view on this topic and hopefully prevent bashers from being so cruel. The song will embed in listeners that there is a way out as long as you try to help yourself first.

Song title: “Quit it Before it Quits You”
Genre: Metal Rock
Explanation: This song emphasizes the importance of giving up smoking. The loud instruments and heavy metal echo will make this topic all the more serious. With rhetoric like “quit it before it quits you” I am trying to get the message across that if you do not quit smoking now, you will become awfully sick and thus your body can not handle anymore cigarettes. The cigarettes gave up on you before you gave up on them.

Song title: “Who Do You Think You Are?
Genre: Hip Hop/ R&B
Explanation: This song goes out to all those high school bullies. I am trying to put an end to all those insensitive kids who think they have to make fun of other kids to be cool. I use questions like “who do you think you are” to patronize these bullies and let them know how shallow and insecure they really are.

Song Title: “He’s in it To Win it”
Genre: Classical Rock
Explanation: This song is about Barak Obama. This song emphasizes the tremendous influence and dedication this man has to this nation and the world. I used phrases like “in it to win it” to let all those Barak bashers know that no matter how bad you make him look, Barak will find a way to redeem himself.

Song Title: “You Should’ve Thought Twice”
Genre: Hip Hop
Explanation: This song goes out to all the male and female infidels. I also stress the fact that in our society men are virtually allowed to do anything they want without worrying about being looked down upon. I put a hip hop beat to it so I can attract children to people in their late thirties. This song asserts thinking twice about engaging in such a shameful act.

Song Title: “Where is All the Money Going?”
Genre: Jazz
Explanation: This song elaborates on the fact that wealthy people are making so much money and the poorer are getting poorer. Why don’t people want to help out other people? If you have the money then why not indulge in the biggest pleasure in life which is giving? What are they doing with their money? I used a jazz melody to this song to create a more sympathetic tone.

Song Title: “ Build a Bridge and Get Over it”
Genre: Rock
Explanation: This song goes out to all the women in the world who are selling themselves cheap. Unfortunately women are forcing themselves to stay in pathetic relationships solely for the reason that they don’t think anyone else would ever be interested in them, and as a result they never want to end the relationship. This song revitalizes’ women’s whole perspective about how they view themselves and with rhetoric like “you are beautiful and deserve better” it gives them a boost of self confidence.

Song Title: “Environmental Friendly”
Genre: Smooth Jazz
Explanation: This song emphasizes the severe effects global warming will have on us in the future. This song has phrases like “turn off the sink”, “recycle your bottles”, and “you can make a change” to allow oneself to become proactive in regards to this catastrophe.

Song title: “Who Do You Think You Are?
Genre: Hip Hop/ R&B
Lyrics: Do what you want, say what you feel just know that I have no fear of you. You walk these halls like you own this place, sucker I got news for you, you aint nothing. I am not afraid of you but I cant help but to listen to what you say. Maybe I’m not good enough. Maybe you’re too good? No no, that can’t be it nobody even likes you. Why do you bully people? To gain popularity? Obviously that’s not working for you so I suggest you find another hobby.

CD COVER: it will have every color you can think of. Every dark, light, shaded, and gray tone to it to represent the variety of songs (issues) I talk about in my album. Also the color will catch the eye of most everyone, so that will encourage them to buy my album. There will be a question mark to represent all the enigmas in the world and then a finger pointing at the viewer just to make the viewer feel like they need to be more proactive.

Tisk Tisk Tisk

1. After considering the arguments, how do you respond to the visual rhetoric of this shirt? Is there a middle ground? How does your exposure, participation, or lack of participation in a spiritual faith influence your decision?

I can’t believe that advertisement has come to a point where they have completely lost their sense of decency. Wearing a T-shirt that has a mockery of the real image of Jesus and calling him “my homeboy” is not only enormously disrespectful, but it is degrading to all religions. It is as if Jesus is your buddy and you go to the club with him on weekdays and get drunk. That is how preposterous the saying “my homeboy” is. I , like Mitchell, believe there is absolutely no middle ground. You do not wear or advertise your piety and deity. One’s religious faith and connection with God is something so sacred and is not to be mad light of. I come from such a religious family that has taught me to give others the respect that I would want. If this is Jesus, whether you believe in him as the son of God (as Christians do) or the Prophet of God (as the Muslims and Jews do) you do not use his name or even image in vain.

2. Use one of Mitchell's quotes to refute his argument.

Mitchell disgracefully said, “Sadly, I even know Christians who wear them.” which means that even some Christians themselves find this T-Shirt rather effective. What kind of message would this shirt be sending out? That we know Jesus and have connections with him to finagle our way into heaven? Come on now, by no means is Jesus anyone’s “homeboy”.

3. If the t-shirt only contained the text, would the impact be less controversial or less persuasive? How would the rhetoric be influenced if the shaded "bubble" letters in this shirt were changed to Gothic lettering?

If the t-shirt only contained the text the impact would be less controversial because it is not as disrespectful and commercial. Without the text the shirt would still be comical but not as degrading If the bubble letters in the shirt were changed to Gothic lettering it wouldn’t make that much of a difference because the statement “Jesus is my homeboy” is where we encounter a problem

4. How would you interpret the image's role in the rhetoric of this t-shirt? Do you see the image as a parody? Consider the way Jesus is depicted, including the halo, facial expression , and his positioning in relationship to the text in your response.

It is too much of a slang and informal phrase that should never be directed or even about someone of Jesus’ spiritual level. I see the image as a parody solely because if a person is wearing a shirt with JESUS on it, could you imagine going into a stall of a bathroom and walking out with Jesus on your shirt? It is just as disgusting when someone doesn’t wash their hands after they use the restroom. Jesus was depicted as some “fella” or some ordinary person that you can “kick it” with. There is zero respect and zero propriety.

5. Would the black t-shirt connote something different than a yellow one with the same text and image? Explain.

No it would not because the problem here is with the image, rhetoric, and text. I don’t think people are paying much attention to the background color although it would be much brighter and conspicuous if it were in yellow. The shirt would still be giving off the exact same impolite, degrading, and ludicrous message.

Build a Bridge and Get Over it!

What are your initial reactions to Kelly's disqualification?
I was appalled not only because I too am Muslim and happen to wear the headscarf (or shall I say hood) as well, but because she is such an amazing runner and something so minor has hindered her dreams and goals. I thought the beauty of living in America was the diverse people and traditions. How come we can’t appreciate the fact that she is a devout Muslim and wears the head cover out of modesty?
2. What is your argument regarding the assertion that Kelly's disqualification constitutes religious discrimination? Does the disqualification of other athletes for non-religious reasons affect your response? If so, why or why not?
If the officials told Kelly to take her head cover off, that is sheer discrimination. Where in the rules does it say no head cover? And do these “rules” accommodate for the handicapped people who might be allergic to the sun so they must resort to hats and head covers? Do you think that there aren’t people like that? There are plenty. The disqualification of other athletes for non-religious reasons was not discrimination that was merely because the rule was only solid colors, but there was no rule that specifically said “no head covers”. If they would have told Kelly only solid colored head scarfs, she would have probably accommodated.
3. If you were to write an argumentative essay on this decision, what further information would you need to obtain to construct a more logos-based argument and counterargument?
I would like to know more about the dynamic of the rules. Also, if history shows that these rules are strictly abided by and implemented. I would also like to see if the athletes are well aware of these rules or if it was written in white ink on white paper on the contract that they signed prior to the race. I would also like to see if the rules accommodate religious and personal needs.
4. How effectively does Rogers defend his stance?
Not well at all. He gave the typical reasoning. He said “Every sport has uniform rules. It has nothing to do with religious discrimination. They were provided with several options that would have allowed her to run without taking off her head covering"”. What “several options” is Rogers talking about? Obviously if there we many other options that Kelly could resort to without taking off her headscarf, she would have.
5. What are some potential solutions to pursue regarding implementing track rules?
The officials need to take into consideration before setting thoughtless rules that infringed on religious and personal regulations. They should reformat their rules and regulations. They should embrace the diversity of this country along with the various religions by not making the uniforms too intricate.
6. If the single solid color rule was implemented so that judges could more easily distinguish the results of a close finish, would this change your response to Kelly's disqualification? Explain your answer.
It would in some aspects. The only aspect I am disputing is the fact that Kelly would have to remove her head scarf. Keeping the wardrobe a certain color to distinguish the results of a close finish sounds fair. If it helps determine a fair win then there is nothing wrong with that. As soon as it infringes on an individuals autonomy that is when it crosses the line.