Guns Guns Should Not Be Allow In College Campus Guns are particularly dangerous. They are more harmful and deadly than most other methods people try. We should not allow gun on campus because it can lead to reckless behavior, might cause lower enrollment due to safety expectations, it might lead to useless/accidental death, likely to increase in both homicide and suicides, and likely to increase the death of campus police officer. Allowing gun on campus can lead to reckless behavior. For example, when a student get into an argument that lead to a fistfight one of them could bring out a gun to shoot and says it is self-defense that was not.
I am sure there are many smokers but the majority most likely are nonsmokers. Faculty and staff that smoke would most likely not support the ban, arguing that not being allowed to smoke on campus can create a traffic rush due to people leaving during breaks to smoke thus causing vehicle accidents. Also, not smoking whenever can have students skipping class or leaving from class early to smoke thus possibly hindering good grades and reducing attention in class. Faculty and staff that do not smoke would support the ban, citing that faculty and staff that smoke can have a negative influence on students and a loss in respect among peers. Ultimately, faculty and staff would support the
In a Mother Jones interview with MIT historian and professor Craig Steven Wilder he stated that it 's "difficult and awkward to celebrate diversity while standing in front of buildings that are named after slave traders". He adds that predominantly white universities have been successful in avoiding conversations about their intertwined history with slavery by distracting people with celebrations of diversity. In the same token, most of these claims are made in mind for marketing rather than managing and sustaining a diverse community. Institutional buildings are where students go to every day. Such names may cause a slight feeling of distancing in the hearts of the minorities that belong to people who faced oppression by these quite popular
Censorship of student speech is incompatible with higher education because not only is college meant for students to go learn and develop but it is also meant for students to be able to explore new ideas and be able to talk and say whatever they please. After watching the two videos by FIRE, i have concluded that in the first video when the University of Cincinnati had only let people that wanted to pass out flyers and make word of what there cause is about the college forced them to stay in a designated area that they could not move out of or they would be arrested for trespassing. The university that is doing this to the group is being very unconstitutional. Also because they are a big university they think that they could do anything even
But the censorship of free speech on college campuses doesn’t just harm students’ abilities to deal with differing opinions; it teaches college students that those differing opinions should be silenced. College students have been indoctrinated into believing that speech which offends them, hurts their feelings, or makes them feel “unsafe” is not protected by the First Amendment. And these students consider any viewpoint which substantially differs from their own as “unsafe”. When these students enter the real world they find that people
1st Amendment and the College Campus Have you ever wondered why some college campus protests are shutdown even though the first amendment is in place? The first amendment does not always protect in every situation. The first amendment wasn’t enforced much until the 1960’s and 70’s, when the anti-war and gender equality protests first started. College campuses have a right to impede on the first amendment if it is restricting someone else’s rights. In many cases some protesters will block off an entrance to an event or will start to harass people walking past.
They could have been left traumatized, or felt as if they no longer felt safe or protected while being on campus. This should have been a huge concern in the Illinois community because rape is wrong, and if this kept happening, students could start to lose their sense of safety because rape can happen to anyone. Yet, even today, generations later, rape is still a prevalent issue on the U of I
Some colleges have expelled their student because of hate speech. One instance, sourced by insidehighered.com is Harley Barber a student of The University of Alabama was expelled for posting a video on Instagram containing racial slurs. I will I protect or support racism, but I will protect and support free speech. Never the less, the University of Alabama is legally not allowed to expel Barber for her racial slurs. The University of Alabama is a public school and must abide by the people 's rights.
Since it is not an option for cruel punishment to be used as a deterrence, the question arises; how does the state exhibit and enforce their supremacy upon the general public to ensure that individuals abide by the norms and customs of society? The goal of this paper is to answer this question through the utilization of French philosopher Michel Foucault’s theory of power. The paper will outline the key components that caused most democratic countries to move away from the idea of cruel penalties as a way to ensure obedience to the set rules. The paper will also differentiate between sovereign and disciplinary power, primarily concentrating on the prevailing relationship between modern society and disciplinary power. By doing so, additional scholars will be incorporated to examine various viewpoints on the notion of power and contrast any critiques present with Foucault’s ideas.
The dissenting party in the controversy condemn students’ opinions on the affirmation that students are immature. The Morse v Frederick case, as well as the Bethel v Fraser case, support this ideology. Bethel v Fraser is a Supreme Court case in which a student used sexual innuendos to advocate his friend for class president (Bethel). The percentage of protesters that use their freedom of speech this way is a minority. Politicians are inaccurate to dismiss students’ opinions as immature as they are prospective voters.
The hiring committee could have stated they were looking for applicants with that experience in person, during the interview process. All of these preventative measures could be a successful way to make sure events like this do not happen in the future to SVSU, and other universities in the country. It would limit the amount of mild cases like this one where the plaintiff does not have a strong argument, and only brought the alleged charges against the university because she was denied the position of Coordinator of Campus Recreation. Cases like this happen all the time, even to our very own recreation center on Ball States Campus. The staff there is very careful with daily operations and tries to limit the amount of liability that they face.
Huntington is an United Brethren affiliated university, and the United Brethren denomination has a stance against homosexuality, stating in their governing documents that state that they “will only recognize marriages between a genetic, biological man and a genetic, biological woman”. As a school following their beliefs, Huntington must also proclaim that this is a truth that they hold to be important, and therefore will not allow same-sex married couples to live in campus housing or to be faculty here. Obviously, this goes drastically against SB1146, which desires the power to prohibit Christian universities, like Huntington, the right to refuse housing to same-sex married
Based on a serious of previous cases, the First Amendment rights of freedom association and speech should apply to college students on a university campus as it does in any other public forum. Therefore, the university should not impose excessive restrictions on students’ expression of these rights, and, if done so, the university should have accurate and applicable justification as to why it must limit these rights. The Healy court held that the First Amendment does, “…authorize advocacy, group activities, and espousal of change. Purposes must be drawn between advocacy, which is entitled to full protection, and action, which is not.
We should all respect and accept the fact that having different views is okay because that is how we learn from each other in order to continue grow as a great
According to Armed Capuses.org, “The overwhelming majority of the 4,400 colleges and universities in the United States prohibit the carrying of firearms on their campuses”. The controversy that surrounds the concealed carry on college campuses vary from negative comments to positive comments. The focus should not be would weapons make people feel uncomfortable like most articles are introducing. The main focus