9/24/2015

Look, vaccinations should be mandatory. If you have a problem with the government making a medical decision for you, it is your prerogative. I mean, I agree, to an extent, the government should not be making all of your medical decisions. However, vaccinations are necessary to prevent massive outbreaks of diseases. For example, ever heard of Polio? You know, the disease that can cause paralysis in the limbs and weak muscles? So you have heard of it! Alright, do you know of anybody who has had it? No? Do you know why? That is because of the Polio vaccination. Announced as a viable solution to the problem in March 26, 1953, the Polio vaccine has reduced Polio outbreaks by 99% in the last 50 years. We are on our way to completely wiping out Polio as a disease that can harm the human race.

Most people against mandatory vaccinations say that vaccinations are linked to autism. However, this is simply untrue. The story of the link began with the publication of a fraudulent research paper in 1998 and has been perpetuated, currently, by Jenny McCarthy. Despite countless studies proving that the link does not exist, many would rather believe the Playboy who claims that vaccinations caused her child’s autism.

Vaccination does not give a 100% guarantee. For example, recently 300 children in Minnesota contracted whopping cough, “of those 177 were hospitalized and 3 died from the disease. The 3 that died were NOT vaccinated but of the 300 about 40% were vaccinated.” One of the main reasons this happened is because the majority of them were not vaccinated. Another outbreak occurred in Disneyland in California with the measles. “189 people from 24 states and the District of Columbia were reported to have measles.” Because measles is so contagious, the blame was thrust upon those who were in Disneyland at the wrong time. However, if the majority of them were vaccinated, the severity would not have been as bad.

It is a simple fix to solve the outbreak of deadly diseases. Vaccination. A great example would be smallpox. The last case of smallpox was in 1977. In conclusion, I think that vaccinations should be required because they keep the general public safe from harm.


Works Used:

http://nlcatp.org/9-major-pros-and-cons-of-vaccinations/

http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/timelines/polio

http://vaccines.procon.org/

http://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/salk-announces-polio-vaccine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_McCarthy#cite_note-Grove-7

9/17/2015

I am very apathetic to the whole drinking age topic. I think that the choice to drink is a personal matter and even if the age limit increased or decreased, people who are “not of age” will still find a way to drink. I think my thoughts towards the topic come from how I see the world. Let me back up a little… No, I do not drink, nor have I ever, nor do I plan to until the age of 21 (long story short- I made a promise to myself when I was younger that I would be a lawful citizen). Back to how I see the world; in today’s world, we “become” an adult at the age of 18. Legally, we can vote, we can move out of our parents’ house, we can get married, and we no longer have a curfew. We also should have our entire lives planned out for ourselves (most enter college by the age of 18 and society tells us that we need to have a plan for our entire lives- I mean, we are going to spend the next four/five years studying for what we want to do with our lives). We can also, speed up our aging process and destroy our lungs while getting addicted to a drug. Sound familiar? Smoking! We can legally buy tobacco at the age of 18. If we can legally make the decision to smoke and should already be making “adult” decisions (i.e. career plans), why should we not have the choice to alcohol (and by extension, marijuana)?

Raising the age limit is another story. Yes, I know that one’s frontal lobes are not fully developed until the age of 25 and that underage drinking is linked with future brain problems, but until someone shows me that other choices we can make by the age of 18 have an increased age limit, I simply will not listen to anyone’s argument. Go ahead and try to raise the age limit; you are not going to stop any of the current legal drinkers from drinking, nor are you going to stop any of the under-age drinkers.

In my opinion, drinking is a personal matter; if you want to drink, you are going to, and if not, then you will not. Whether or not someone increases or decreases the age limit is not going to make any difference. However, if someone does decrease it, they would be making illegal actions legal, and if someone increased it, they would just have angry people on their hands.

9/10/2015

“Gun Control” is our next big topic. I am going to start this post with informing everyone that I do not care if you own a gun. I am not trying to infringe on your right to own one. I just think that we need some stricter laws around owning guns. This is a very loose use of the word stricter. All I am asking for is for people who want to buy a gun to (1) pass an universally (federally mandated) background check, (2) be formally trained in weapon use, and (3) pass a psychological evaluation.

In my opinion, if you want a gun, you cannot be a convicted felon, you cannot be a danger to society (determined by a psychiatrist), and you cannot not register your gun. Though it may take longer to purchase a gun, at least the public would be able feel a little safer knowing that the guns sold are going to people who can handle the responsibility of owning  one. In addition to this, with less guns available to the public, the amount of guns available to criminals would decrease. (This is correlated with the 1.4 million guns that were stolen between 2005 and 2010 by criminals out of US homes.) Also, studies have shown that with increased gun control, gun homicide and suicide rates drop. This data was obtained by looking at the rates in Switzerland and Finland, two areas with stricter gun control laws than the United States. I also request formal weapons training because with the training, the less likely someone is going accidentally shoot themselves or someone else.

Personally, I just do not want anymore mass shootings. If we, as a society, can prevent possible deaths, then why do we not do it? With stricter laws, we can ensure that the pubic is safer from itself. I mean, its not like we do not have a standing army so the public needs to be trained on how to use weapons (Switzerland). In conclusion, I think that gun control should be standardized across all states and should be restricted to where only people who can handle the responsibility of owning one can have one.


Other Sites Referenced:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment

http://bearingarms.com/crushing-new-argument-gun-control/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/14/domestic-violence-guns-restraining-orders_n_5982774.html?utm_hp_ref=gun-control

https://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

9/3/2015

Okay, so, how do I start this post? Global climate change is a real thing. That’s it. That’s all I have. Frankly, I do not understand people’s arguments saying that it does not exist. That is how I will continue this post; addressing other people’s unfortunate opinion on something that is real.

A recent argument against climate change that I have heard is that the Earth experiences cooling and warming cycles and we are currently on a warming cycle. Okay, cool! You know something about the earth. But! Did you know that these cycles coincide with the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? Did you also know that carbon dioxide levels have never been this high before? Did you know that our current carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere is about 400 parts per million and is still rising? Did you also know that the last largest peak occurred about 300,000 years ago and was only about 290 ppm. Now I am not going to sit here and blast facts at whoever may be reading this, just know that those who claim that this climate change is just a part of Earth’s process are both wrong and right. Yes, warming is a natural part of Earth’s natural process, but not to this extent.

Another argument against climate change is that it is going to cost us a bunch of money to try to live clean. In reality, it will not cost as much as we spend now and will save us a bunch of money in the long run. And after it’s all said and done, the cost of producing 1 kilowatt hour of electricity will only be 1.8 cents more than what it is now. Furthermore, by adopting a carbon capture plan earlier, we would have reduced carbon emissions by 80%.

I am going to end with the following link. If you still would like evidence supporting climate change, please click on the link, and learn something new.

Click me if you still do not believe in climate change.