new online poker developments

In recent weeks, the online poker world has turned into chaos.  The three biggest websites; PokerStars, Full Tilt, and Absolute Poker have all shut down.  An estimated 10 million Americans play online poker and are being affected by this movement that was started by the FBI.  Online gambling within the United States is illegal but the website go to places off-shore, such as places within the Caribbean on Europe.  People play poker and do sports betting online with websites that are off-shore, which is completely legal.  The problem with what the poker sites were doing was that they were laundering the money into bank accounts within the United States.  The money that is deposited into the accounts must also be kept off shore.  By funneling the money into US bank accounts they were deceiving banks or bribing them to allow the accounts to be opened.  By opening these accounts they were never paying taxes on the money that was deposited by the players.  In the United States that is called tax evasion.  In 2006 a law was passed that did not directly outlaw online poker sites, but instead barred businesses from taking payments for "unlawful" online gambling.  This left the definition of what is unlawful to others.  After the law was passed, the largest site used by American players, PartyPoker, was forced to shut down its operations in the United States.  But other companies thought they would be able to navigate the law.  They stated poker is a game of skill and consequently could not be categorized as gambling.  In addition, moving outside the United States allowed them to have a little more free reign.  The biggest issue with this controversy is whether the players from these websites should be allowed to withdraw their money from their accounts.  Now that the government has the online gambling world in hand, they now are trying to figure out how to regulate it.

This is important for all of us to care about for three main reasons.  Starting off with the fact that the legal online gaming age is 18.  By the end of the year the whole class will be 18 years old and legally would be aloud to open up and account.  Another reason that this is an important issue is because gambling addictions are on the rise and are increasing dramatically.  If they set new regulations on who can gamble online, if anyone, it can have an effect on the gambling epidemic.  Lastly, by having the government look at online gambling, it's really putting a spotlight on gambling as a whole.  This means that new laws can be made for casino's and other places that allow gambling.

online poker shut down sources

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2011/0418/A-full-tilt-federal-shutdown-of-online-poker
Summary of why the sites got shut down.  Laundering money through US banks.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-poker-busts-20110416,0,308055.story
In depth information about the issue.  Told a couple stories of people whom either make their living playing poker online and who rely on that money to survive.

http://www.internet-poker.co.uk/Poker-News/Poker-Industry/Online-Poker-Sites-Shut-Down~4106.html
Spoke about the penalties that the officials of the websites could possibly face, which is up to 30 years in prison and a $1 million out of pocket fine (not able to take from the company).

http://www.businessinsider.com/online-poker-players-get-their-money-back-2011-4
Explained the difficulties of how/when/if the players will be getting their money back that are currently in frozen accounts.  The sites should be at fault and not the players, but it will be tough to get the players back their money because they got it through somewhat illegal means.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110419/business/110419682/
Gave a full summary of the events that were taking place with the online poker.  Also, spoke about the law passed in 2006 that made online gambling within the US illegal.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-04-18/news/ct-met-charity-poker-20110417_1_charity-poker-chris-moneymaker-charitable-games
A charity poker event that takes place nearly everyday in Chicago is being close to getting shut down.  The charities are only receiving about 10% of the profits from the events which is pretty pitiful.  Also, there is side betting going on where the players will tip the dealer instead of a piece of the pot going to charity.  There have been a few incidences similar to that which is making authorities very suspicious of the games.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXWPnuzOco0
This is a video from CNN and does a great job explaining some of the pro's and con's to legalizing online gambling.

Race in America

Both of these sites were really interesting to read.  Starting off with the Tribune article, there were many issues that struck me.  By the middle of this century, it is believed that whites will be the minority in the country.  This is weird to think about because everyone is always referrring to blacks and latinos as minoritys.  There are many ideas that come to mind when thinking about minorities.  Benefits and unfair treatment initially come to mind.  Some say it's easier to get into colleges but others say they are oppressed.  I don't think that being a minority is an issue when it comes to power because there have been many cases in which the minority has equal or same power, take Egypt or South Africa as examples.  It's surprising how many times there are acts of racism going on today.  Recently at UC San Diego a noose was found.  The difference now is there there are always reprecussions for the offender.  This shows that overall there is progress being made with racism because even white people are willing to protest to get the white person (assuming the student was white) in troublefor offending the black community.  One of the issues that both website talked about was the unemployment of black people.  The CNN article study showed that whites were two times as likely to get the same job as a black person.  Even a white felon was equally as likely to get a call back as a black person.  This is clear that racism still exists in the hiring process and work place.  It's pretty eye opening to think that a person who has committed a potentially terrible crime can get an entry level job before a black who is a good citizen.  It's sad to think that the people who are actually doing the hiring are this racist or think that little of blacks.  Unemployment in America is obviously a really big issue, especially with a disproportion of the unemployment coming from the black community.  This connects to the CNN article because most unemployed people are looking to get entry level jobs, not executive positions.  If blacks and whites were truly getting an equal chance of getting a job, the unemployment gap would get closed a little, but not completely.  There are still many problems in the black community that are much more prevelant than in the white community.  The social problems such as education really hurt them because they aren't getting the oppertunity to go to the schools that will enable them to go to college, let alone graduate high school. It's really tough that this is how our society still is today, and like the last assignment we did the country still has a ton of progress that needs to be made.  Like what was said in the Wise articles, blacks feel as if they are second class citizens, and reading some of these Tribune and CNN articles leads me to believe just that.  Whites and blacks alike need to treat each other equally.  Once that happens with  everyone equal opportunities the social and socioeconomic gap we are seeing now will close.

Mock Trials

I actually disagree with the verdict on both of the trials. I think that in the David Jones case he should have been found guilty. And Elise Roberts should have won her case too. I don't think the facts were looked at as they should have been but rather people went with their beliefs over the facts. This means that people in the class are being critical of women who are saying they have been sexually assaulted or raped.  In the David Jones case I think that it was pretty clear that he raped her. People missed the part about the ripped shirt and how hard someone has to pull to rip a shirt. Also, if it was an accident she would have taken the shirt to get it fixed. She couldn't look at the shirt anymore because it would remind her of the rape. The Elise Roberts case was pretty clear of sexual harassment.  The peoples idea of sexual harassment in class is different than the courts idea. I believe that Kevin didn't think he harassed her, but she obviously thought so. After multiple comments and no solution for the problem, this was a clear sexual harassment case. As far as these two cases went, one would think the class is fairly conservative and thinks that women should stick up for themselves.

I don't think that rape is much of a problem at DHS as it may be at other high schools. I think people are smart enough to know that word would get out fast and that it's a crime. Sexual harassment is another thing though. That goes on a lot but a lot of times the girls like the attention so they won't say anything. They know they are being recognized so they will happily take the comment. Also, they will sometimes be asking for attention with how they dress and whatnot. Another reason is that they don't want to seem like a snitch and get a bad name for themselves. I don't think there's any way to eliminate this in the school. People have been talking how they do for years so it's not going to all the sudden change. If a girl doesn't think that a comment is sexual harassment and another girl thinks the same comment is, what should the school do? I think it's an issue that will always be wrestled with and will continue to be a grey area with no definite answer. It's an unsettling conclusion but it's true.

Wisconsin Teacher Union Fight

The Wisconsin Governor is trying to "balance the budget" in the state and bring the deficit back. He plans on doing this by trying to limit the rights of the teachers union. The union, now, is able to negotiate as a group. This is why their benefits are so good. The proposal would strip workers of the right to bargain over anything other than wages. This means besides their pay, they wouldn't be able to protest for anything. The president of the Wisconsin Education Advisory Counsel said, "Without a voice in the schools, without rights to speak up on behalf of students and the education profession, educators are concerned about the future," she said. "Wisconsin's governor and Legislature have denied opportunity for discussion and collaboration. By stripping away the rights of workers, they've left nothing more than one's ability to have a voice and to stand together and say this is wrong for Wisconsin."  This quote shows that she is scared that the teachers will be less motivated to do their job well.  Another issue that can come up from this is people will be less inclined to be a teacher because part of the reason people want to be a teacher is all of the great benefits that come with it.  Another big issue is the tenure that teachers there currently receive.  The governor wants to alter the system to make it easier to fire teachers that aren't performing to where they should be.  I don't think that any of these issues will get completely resolved unless both sides are willing to compromise on the issues they feel most strongly about.

Freakonomics: Final Post

After reading this book I was really fantasized at what kind of an effect a book can have on a person.  Mainly this book taught me to not take everything for face value.  Almost everything has more to it than meets the eye and it just takes time and creativity to find it.  The innovative ideas that the authors present in the book are pretty crazy because hardly anyone would be smart enough or creative enough to figure out what they did.  So what does all of this mean?  It means that what people are consistently taught isn't always true.  Another important idea that this book teaches its readers is that everything that people do is in response to an incentive, no matter how big or small.  Economics is studying how the economy works and functions.  This book, although it may seem like it has nothing to do with the economy, is all about the social science behind the economy.  Learning how people act and react in certain situations determines how the economy will be effected.  So before trying to see why the market is doing something unusual or there is a trend happening, it's almost a guarantee that something different is going on in society or the way people are reacting to something.  

Freakonomics Entry #5: Statistics and Why Kids Turn Out the Way They Are

The book Freakonomics offers some statistics that are really interesting.  With these statistics is offered an explanation of why people percieve them to be different than they are.  Let's start with a situation that a parent may face.  A mom won't let her daughter play at a girls house because she knows that the family keeps a gun in their home.  But this same mom lets her daughter play at her friends house who has a swimming pool.  Which is more dangerous?  Clearly everyones initial reaction is the gun, but in reality it's the swimming pool.  In a given year there is one drowning for every 11,000 residential pools in the US.  That translated to about 550 children under the age of 10 that drown every year.  Meanwhile, there is merely 1 child killed by a gun for every 1 million plus guns.  Since there are about 200 million guns in the US that means that about 175 children under the age of 10 die each year from gun.  The likelyhood of dying from a pool is 1:11,00 as opposed to 1:1 million.  This mothers child is far more likely to die at the friends house with the pool than the gun.  One point that the author made which is very smart is when he says that risks that you control are much less a source of outrage than risks that are out of your control.  Getting randomly killed by a gun, although extremely rare, is something that you cannot control and therefore makes you afraid of it.  There are a ton of people who are afraid of flying, but not scared of driving a car.  Even though there are about 40 times more car accidents, flying a plane is out of your control.  Another concept that he came up with that was innovative was his simple equation; Risk=hazard+outrage.  When hazard is high and outrage is low, people under react.  The opposite is also true; when hazard is low and outrage is high, they overreact.  So how can we accurately access our risk factor?  We can't because we have pre-concieved notions about everything.

Freakonomics Entry #4: Does your Name Matter?

The book Freakonomics analyzes the affect different names have on people.  Parents always want the best for their kids so giving them a 'good' name seems to be essential.  So does your name change what your life will be like?  Many peoples initial reaction would be no, but this book proves that your name will effect you when someone doesn't know you and just sees the name on a piece of paper.  Some parents believe their child won't prosper unless they have the right name.  In 1958 a man from NYC named Robert Lane decided to name his son Winner.  They lived in the projects and everyone else in the family had a typical name.  A few years later he had a 7th child.  He named the boy Loser.  So how did his kids end up?  Well Winner has a criminal record a mile long with 3 dozen arrests.  Loser on the other hand went to prep school then college at Lafayette College all on scholarship.  Loser is now in the New York Police Department as a detective (his mothers dream for him).  And his friends call him Lou now, not Loser.  This is a prime example of names having no relevance on the outcome of life.  Now let's take another example.  According to a study, two people with identical resumes were sent to the same employer.  One person had the name DeShawn Williams and the others name was Jake Williams.  Jake would be more likely to get a call back.  Why?  This is because, according to the study, black sounding names have an economic penalty.  Two people from identical backgrounds named Jake and DeShawn will most likely have the same life outcomes.  But the kind of parents who name their kid Jake typically don't live in the same neighborhood or have the same circumstances as the boy named DeShawn.  From this the employer can assume that Jake comes from a better area and is more sophisticated.  So why don't people from more depressed areas name their children with names that will make them seem from better areas?  This is because there is a penalty within the community for trying to act against their culture.  They don't want to stand out because this will cause scrutiny that is unwanted.  So in conclusion the name that you possess as a person has little to no effect on what you will make of yourself.  Where you're from and what you try to make of your life is the difference maker.

Freakonomics Entry #3: Why do Drug Dealers Live with their Moms?

This book gives insight into a gang that sells crack in Chicago.  Many of times all we hear on the news about gangs is that they are fighting for territory or somebody was killed in a drug deal.  Most people never realize how complex of an operation it truly is to run a gang and be successful.  Running a gang is like running a multi million dollar corporation.  There is millions of dollars at stake in the business.  It's a game where people risk their lives for the chance to move up in the gang.  I used to wonder why people joined gangs.  The reason is because they have to.  The gang has such a big presence around town that if you aren't running with them then you are putting yourself in danger.

So how does the gang really make its money?  Like all solid business' it starts from the ground up.  There are people who aren't even in the gang who want to get in who will pay the gang fee.  Then there are other people around town who will pay the gang for a protection fee.  This way the gang will have their back if anything goes wrong.  Everyone in the gang has monthly dues to pay.  Then comes the big money maker for the gang; the actual dealing of the crack.  The teens standing on street corners with a 1 in 4 chance of being killed in their time dealing drugs.  One of the characters in the book who was high up in the gang was making an average of $64,000 a month in his peak.  He had to pay the people above him 20% of that every month.

Now to the 'foot soldiers'.  The people who risk it all and get little to nothing in return.  Those people made merely $3.30 an hour, which is close to a third of what minimum wage is.  On average they are arrested 5.9 times and have 2.6 near fatal wounds in their life.  They are 50 times more likely to die than having the most dangerous job in the US which is a timber cutter.  Many ask why they do it.  They do it because the only way to get to the top is to start at the bottom.  They are hoping that they will be one of the lucky few who get to move up the gangs ranks and start making the big money.  Not only that, in depressed areas when you are uneducated, there aren't many options.  Freakonomics did a really good job of explaining the multi million dollar business of running a gang and also how people get involved with it.

Freakonomics Entry #2: The Internet Helps Everyone

The internet boom occurred in the 1990s.  The internet has a big effect on almost everybody's lives.  In the late 1990s the price of life insurance dropped dramatically.  Many wondered why the radical change happened so fast, but the real reason is the internet happened.  All the sudden people were able to compare insurance quotes to get the best possible deal.  When there is competition, price goes down.  Companies were publicly competing to get more customers, and all the customers cares about was getting the lowest possible price on a premium.  Within a year, customers were paying $1 Billion less per year for life insurance, all because of the internet.  Nowadays we see this a lot on the internet.  Hotels, car rental, car insurance, etc. all having side by side quotes on the internet.  In turn, this provides competition in the market which will in the end help the consumers.

The main source of the internet is used for gaining information on various topics and also news.  When people are able to look at multiple sources of information, they are able to form their own opinions and be more open minded.  This makes for a stronger country because people will be on both sides of an issue.  Like the title of this blog post, the internet truly does benefit everybody.

Freakonomics Entry #1

Freakonomics is best selling book written by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner.  Both of these men are economists who study various cause and effect situations along with how the economy works.  In this entry I will introduce a couple of their ideas that are abstract when first thought about, but then make complete sense when fully analyzed.  In the past few years there have been a few scandals that involved teachers cheating for their students.  This problem has been especially prevalent within the Chicago Public School system. One of the lessons that the authors teach the reader is that everybody responds to incentives, and that's why they act the way they do.  Some people study extra hard to get an A in a class so they can get an iPod from their parents.  Other people stop smoking cigarettes because the sin tax is going up.  And some teachers cheat for their students to prevent themselves for going on probation.  Everybody responds to incentives differently, and incentives are what keeps the economy going.  High stakes standardized testing puts stress on everybody, but especially the teachers.  If a good number of students do exceedingly well, then the teacher will be promoted.  The contrary is also true though. 

The issue is how to catch the cheating teacher.  Some teachers have blatantly cheated by putting answers on the board.  This was done by a fifth grade teacher in Oakland.  Some teachers will give their students extra time to finish the test, and others will give the answers when a student asks.  And the worst way is when a teacher changes the students answers after they are done with the test.  The CPS did a study on classes that were suspected of cheating.  They devised a formula and when a block of answers were all answered correctly for a class (or close to), cheating was a high possibility.  The correct block of answers often came at the end of the test where the questions are harder.  That proves that there was even a higher likelihood for cheating because the chance of sub par students getting those questions correct is quite low.  In the end they found that 5% of the classrooms had either cheating students or teachers.  The real loser in all of this cheating is the student.  They are the loser because they and their parents will see the inflated test score and be happy.  Then the next year their scores will return to the low level they are truly at.  Here's an example: for each grade level a student is at, that's what level they should score at.  So a fifth grader who is perfectly on par will score a 5.0.  A student in fifth grade scores a 3.8, in 6th grade they score 7.1, and in 8th grade they went back to their old ways and scored a 5.6.  This is a clear indication that in 6th grade they experienced cheating.  I am really excited to continue to read the book and see what other great analysis' these authors can offer.

Abortion Argument

Abortion is probably one of the biggest issues in America today and will continue to be because the two opposing sides are so passionate about their argument.  The Supreme Court has given power to the states to impose regulations on abortion as long as they're not undue burdens.  Theoretically, this means that the states cannot deny a woman's right to having an abortion.  Many abortion clinics are being forced to change the way they operate because their state government is imposing rules.  I think that something that would be considered an undue burden would be anything that makes the woman change her mind.  Getting an abortion is a huge deal in a woman's life so when they decide they are going to do it, they are positive that that's what will be best for them.  If they end up having to jump through hoops to get an appointment or have to go back multiple times before the operation, that would be an undue burden.  Something like getting an abortion is an incredibly hard time in their life so clinics should be making it easy for the patient.

Health care plans should cover the cost of the operation to have an abortion.  Having an abortion is simply just a procedure.  Almost all procedures people have are covered by health care, if they have it to begin with.  Some wil make the argument that since the woman could have prevented getting pregnant (assuming it concentual) that health care shouldn't cover it.  That is true that it could have been prevented but it's no different than breaking an arm skateboarding.  It's the own persons fault and could have been prevented.  And certainly the broken arm is covered.  If the patient wanting an abortion doesn't have health care, then they should get assistance paying for the operation.  The country has a responsibility to help its citizens and they doing something like that would help them so much.  The percentage of taxpayer dollars that will go to assisting people to pay for abortions is so minute and that's why the government should assist in the payment process. 

Abortions should be legal in all circumstances up to the third trimester of the pregnancy.  There is no reason why lawmakers and other people should be able to tell women what they can and can't do with their body's.  Also, if they have made the choice not to have the baby, then they are clearly not suited to have it.  If they were forced to have the baby, they wouldn't care for the child, partially because they wouldn't be able and also they wouldn't have the means.  When woman opt to have an abortion, chances are it was a mistake.  Making one mistake should not effect someone the rest of their lives, especially if it can be avoided.  This is why abortion should continue to be legal.

District 113 Renovations

There are some pre-conceived notions about district 113, some of which are good and others should be changed.  The district has a great academic reputation because of the high test scores that come out of the schools.  There are high test scores because the teachers in district 113 and the feeder school are very good.  Deerfield High also has a not so great reputation for having strong facilities.  Within the school there are a lot of essential things that the school needs to change.  For example the school was built 50 years ago.  Most of the school has heating, air conditioning, and windows from 50 years ago.  Everyone knows how much technology has changed over that time.  The renovation plans are a great idea and would truly benefit everyone in the community. 

The renovation plans would be a great addition to the school.  If the school renovates the heating, air, and windows in the old part of the school, it would save money in the long run.  Technology in that department has changed dramatically over the last 50 years.  This would make the heating and air bill go down because the system would be a lot more efficient.  Also, by having better windows it would keep those classrooms at a more neutral temperature.  Renovating the athletic facilities and adding a field house would be great because it would benefit everyone in the school.  It would increase everybody's productivity because the fields would be able to withstand any amount of play.  The games would always have the same field conditions too because the artificial turf never changes.  If the school was able to build a field house that would be beneficial to everyone in the community.  Not only would the students at the school be able to use it, it could be open to the public on the weekends.  People would be able to use the indoor track in the winter and also workout there at little to no cost.  Having great athletic facilities not only benefits athletes during their season, or students in gym class.  It will benefit everyone in the community.

Having all of these new great amenities at the school would make the tax payers take a little hit.  Even though everybody's taxes would barely increase, many don't want to pay at all.  Residents would be paying for the renovations in the short run but in the long run it would help everyone.  Compared to other communities the athletic facilities here are much inferior to many other schools.  Even though we have a SLIGHTLY better academic reputation than those schools, having great facilities will make young family's want to move there.  If these changes could be made, everybody's property would be worth more because this would be a more attractive area to come to.  Overall, taking a small hit to your taxes in the short run are worth it because you would be able to boast some of the best facilities in the state, and also increase the value of your property in the long run.   

The Execution

"The Execution" was an informative documentary on the death penalty, and it focused on two men in particular.  Clifford Boggess was a man who was executed for murdering two old men in cold blood.  His sentence of death was proper punishment.  Although I do think that Boggess changed as a man when he was on death row, he should still have been sent to die.  Even though he changed and may have been a good man in the end, it doesn't change what he had done.  If the court system would let him go off of death row that would send a poor message to the public that they are willing to give murderers a second chance, not to mention the family of the victim was looking forward to the closure.  I do think that he believed he was going to heaven, and hence that's the reason he was able to accept the penalty for his crimes.  I think that's irrelevant though because those are his internal thoughts.  It's great that he believes that but who really knows what's going to happen.  Boggess was a changed person but that doesn't mean he should have his sentence changed.  If he was truly remorseful for the murders of his victims he should feel obligated to die in order to compensate for pain he caused so many people.
Leslie Gosch is a prime example of the glitches in the death penalty system.  Anybody who is teased with their death is cruel and unusual punishment.  Although I do believe that the death penalty is an acceptable form of punishment, the process of them dying should be quick and not dragged out.  This case has changed my understanding of capital punishment, although it hasn't changed my core belief about it.  I am a lot more informed about the effects that the death penalty has.  After learning more and more about the death penalty I actually have a stronger belief in keeping it in place. 

Bullying

This is a new era of bullying, and it is cyber bullying.  Most peoples first thoughts when they think of a bully is a big, bad kid who picks on everyone.  Sometimes that is the case, but recently it hasn't been.  These "bullies" aren't really bullies at all most of the time.  In the Tyler Clementi case the woman who helped Tyler's roommate stream the videos was supposedly a great person.  She was in her first year of a six year Pharmacy Program at Rutgers.  If someone was to look at her life a month ago compared to now, they would be polar opposites.  This is a case of someone making a terrible mistake because she didn't think of what could happen.  She didn't think through her decision and that will probably cost her, her life.  The people who are being bullied are normal students.  The only difference is that one or a few people have something against them, not everyone.  In the Tyler Clementi case it was his roommate basically trying to prove that he was gay.  It's interesting because the students being bullied are typically really nice and good students.  They're being bullied for anything that someone doesn't like about them.  This is anything from a student being gay to someone overweight.  It's not fair to bully someone about something they can't control.  There are a lot of things that can be done to help prevent bullying and also help the victims.  For example in school the consequences for hazing are a lot stiffer than they used to be.  If the penalties are worse, then the bullies will be less inclined to do it.  The students who are being bullied are the ones in a tough spot.  Schools can make support groups.  These groups probably wouldn't be that effective because nobody wants to admit that they've been bullied.  Also, the students being bullied can report the bullies, but once again they don't want be the tattle tales or have to explain their situation.  In this new technology age anything that is put in writing on the internet will be there forever.  Putting stuff on the internet for bullying purposes are worse than talking to someones face because after they say it it's gone.  That can't be said for posting on the internet.  With so many functions of the internet (instant messaging, email, facebook) there are so many more avenues for bullies to get their message across.  Also, it's easier for the bullies because they don't have to see the person face to face when they do it.  Bullying will always be one of the toughest things to prevent because all the different ways of bullying.  This also makes it worse for the victims because what is said about them can be seen by everyone.  Many people like Anderson Cooper are going to great lengths to help prevent bullying.  They are holding town hall meetings and meetings at school to stop the epidemic.  Hopefully all the awareness of bullying will make the people bullying less inclined to do it.

Drug Testing in Schools?

Drug testing in school is an issue where there is no definitive answer.  I think that the school should drug test their students.  Students going to school is a privilege and is more or less a job.  In the real world companies are able to drug test their employees.  They do this so their employees are working to their potential.  By the school drug testing their students, they will make sure that the students are working to their full potential.  Also, there is nothing wrong with trying to stop illegal activity.  By having the drug testing system in place, it would definitely help prevent students from starting drugs.  There needs to be some conditions as to who gets tested and the punishment.  The testing needs to be completely random and should be a portion of each class.  This way the school won't have any bias towards who they test.  Also, the punishments should vary.  If a student is going to get tested they should have the choice to admit to using drugs.  This type of student won't have a very severe punishment the first time.  They will have to take a class, and that's it for a first offense.  The students who actually test positive will also have to take the class, but also get a 3 day in-school suspension.  Students who either test positive or admit to using drugs will have one random follow up test within a few months of their first offense.  Repeat offenders will get a 5 day in-school, then a 5 day out of school.   Overall, having a drug testing system in place will help prevent students from doing drugs and will also help the school create a more positive focused environment.

"7 Days in September"

The documentary "7 Days in September" depicts video and reactions from 9/11 and the week following the attack.  The film did a phenomenal job recording the events that occurred on 9/11 and the week after after.  One of the great things that the film did was it got reactions from all different people to get different perspectives.  All of the clips put together made for an inspirational film that showed New York's true colors. 

If there were two words to describe the people of New York and the city itself in the week after 9/11 it would be conflicted and generous.  After the attack itself some of the first footage shown was people walking through the dust and debris filled streets.  The people would come inside and would be covered in grey debris.  The attacks on the World Trade Centers didn't only change the landscape of the block that it was in, but rather the landscape of many blocks around the area.  The attacks on 9/11 effected everyone who lived in New York from a physical standpoint because the city was basically shut down in the week following the attacks.  All offices were shut down to work and getting around the city was nearly impossible. 

There were a lot of issues brought up by the video.  A lot of them had to do with approaching the situation with kids who didn't fully understand the situation.  It's nearly impossible for a child to understand the magnitude of the situation.  Some parents gave their kids a very watered down version, while others got the full blow by blow.  Overall, the feeling for all of the kids was just sad because kids react to their parents, so since they were sad their kids were too.

If there was anything positive to take away from the events that occured on 9/11, it could be the way the city came together in support of each other.  After the attacks, in the same day, people were lined up ready to give blood to victims.  People were driving supplies to centers that were helping the firemen.  On a normal day in New York, neither of these things would have ever happened.  People would think of reasons about why they shouldn't give blood, but that day was different.  They were ready and willing to do whatever they could to help.  The people of New York were thinking about each other instead of just themselves.  As the 7 days went on, the people of New York seemed to get closer because they realized that in order to survive the attacks they would have to come together.