Hearing is a sense that most of us take for granted. Many of us do not realize that within that seemingly simple organ is a complex and intricate anatomical architecture capable of recognizing and processing sounds. The process begins when the sound waves arrive at the outer ear. After which, they are funneled into the air canal where they will find themselves banging on the eardrum. This creates vibrations which move a tiny connected bone called the hammer or malleus. As the hammer vibrates, it passes down the sound vibrations to the other two small bones (ossicles) and then send them through the fuel-filled and snail-like structure called the cochlea. Inside the cochlea is the spinal organ of Corti, the receptor organ for hearing. The latter contains tiny hair cells, which translate the vibrations of sound into electrical impulses that are carried on to the brain by sensory nerves to be interpreted.
So, that is how our ears process sound. Incredible isn’t it? Not every one of us though is lucky to have that gift of hearing, and this is where cochlear implant makes a world of difference. As soon as a person with hearing disability puts this artificial ear on, he is able to hear the creak of a chair, the crackling of fireworks, the coo of a pigeon, and the swooshing of the waves. It gives him the ability to hear different kinds of sounds, recognize their source, and know where they are coming from. Most important, it helps develop his communication skills, enables him to learn the sounds of words, and allows him to hear and recognize his own voice. This elegant, sophisticated technology bypasses the role of the hair cells by transmitting sound signals directly to the brain.
List of Pros of Cochlear Implants
1. It can improve hearing.
Unlike a hearing aid, a cochlear implant does not amplify sound. Rather, it stimulates just a few locations in the cochlea, replacing the functions of thousands nerves fibers. This improves hearing and allows deaf individuals to hear sounds. The implant enables them to verbally communicate with others and makes it easier for them to function in mainstream society.
2. It allows children born with ANSD to attend regular school.
It can be devastating for parents to hear other children bubble as they talk while their own child can’teven mutter “mum” or “dad”. Choclear implant offers hope because it can be implanted on children beginning at 12 months of age. This gives ANSD children a chance to live a normal life as well as attend normal schools.
3. Adults may benefit immediately.
After the initial tuning sessions, adults may immediately experience the benefits of hearing, which may continue to improve after three months. Although in some cases, improvements are slower and may take more than three months.
4. Helps people understand speech without lip-reading.
Most individuals born deaf learn to communicate through lip reading. A cochlear implant can make communication easier by not needing one to lip read anymore. However, even if this is not possible, the implant can eventually help a person recognize the sound of words with the aid of lip reading.
5. Enables one to enjoy music.
Imagine hearing a beautiful music for the first time. This is inarguably one of the best gifts of hearing.
List of Cons of Cochlear Implants
1. The sounds are unnatural sound.
While cochlear implant makes hearing possible, the sounds patient hear are not the same sound heard through normal hearing. Environmental noises and people’s voices just sound different when heard through the device.
2. The surgical procedure is risky.
A cochlear implant is a major procedure. Since the location of the operation is near the brain, general anesthesia is needed to put the patient to sleep (and we know that general anesthesia has negative side effects to some people). Injury to the facial nerve is also a serious risk. This nerve goes through the middle ear and is the one responsible for the movement of our facial muscles.
When this nerve is injured, a person may suffer from temporary or full weakening of the facial muscles, or at worst full paralysis on the side of the face that is on the same side as the cochlear implant. There is also the risk of acquiring meningitis. In 2002, the FDA first issued its first warning about the increased risk of bacterial meningitis among children who have undergone cochlear implant. A study by both the agency and the CDC showed that children whose implant includes a positioner are at increased risk of bacterial meningitis caused by Streptococcus pneumonia. This risk can continue for up to 2 years after the implantation.
3. Loss of residual hearing.
Another risk presented by having the implant is that any remaining or residual hearing a person has maybe destroyed in the implanted ear.
4. Risk to infection requiring the implant to be removed.
A cochlear implant can cost thousands of dollars, and that money could just be easily wasted when a serious infection requiring the removal of the implant occurs.
5. Made some medical examinations and treatments not possible.
This hearing device is made of a combination rubber, plastic and metal. Certain medical examinations and treatments, such as MRI imaging, ion radiation therapy and electrical surgery, may dislodge the implant or demagnetized its internal magnet.
6. It is for a life time.
Children who have undergone the operation at a very young age may have to grow old with their cochlear implant on in order to retain their ability to hear. What is worse is that during a person’s lifetime, the manufacturer of the implant could go out of business. This makes getting a replacement part or customer service in the future very uncertain.
The cochlear implant is no doubt one of the best things that happened to people with hearing disability. However, its cons showed us that deciding to get one should not be done in a rush. Individuals, and especially parents who are planning to let their toddler go through the implant procedure, should carefully consider its long-term effects.
Because of its focus on regular testing, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has become a huge subject of controversy. The debates surrounding the act have become heated since it was put under review and in the process of reauthorization. While the NCLB initially received bipartisan support, political parties in the US are now pushing arguments on whether the act is being implemented effectively. Both advocates and critics cited extensive evidentiary support of their own position on this controversial matter. To get a well-informed insight on this topic, let us take a look at the act’s pros and cons.
List of Pros of the No Child Left Behind Act
1. Improvements in Test Scores
Generally, test scores have been observed to have improved since 2002 when the act was implemented. Aside from this, test scores of students belonging to minority groups have also improved since then, which is a good sign for the future.
2. Quality State Academic Content
The NCLB links state academic content to student educational outcomes. It requires the implementation of school improvement using scientific research methods in the classroom, teacher development courses and parent programs.
3. Quality Education for the Underserved
It is good to know that the act requires educational institutions to focus on providing quality education to underserved students, including children from low-income families, those with disabilities, those who are non-English speakers, as well as those belonging to African-American and Latino communities.
4. Higher Teacher Qualifications
One of the primary issues the NCLB was designed to tackle is making sure that teachers are highly qualified for the work jobs that they do. Since it was pushed, more people in the field of teaching have become more qualified and more highly educated than before. This means that schoolchildren are now getting quality education from the best possible instructors.
5. Extra Help
Regular testing has its benefits, and one of them is helping schools with identifying students who need extra help. And due to the fact that schools would lose financial support if students do not do well on their exams, they offer extra incentives to help struggling students. Since the passing of the NCLB, thousands of students have been receiving tutorials and other free supplemental help from their schools.
6. Parental Understanding
Remember that without proper assessments, we cannot know how well students are doing in school. Thanks to the tests the NCLB mandates, parents are having a better idea of how their children are performing. And because the test scores are made public, parents are also getting a better understanding of what available options, such as charter or private schools, can provide a better place for learning.
7. Advantage for Minority Students
The NCLB was designed to measure educational growth and status by ethnicity and to help close the achievement gap between white and minority students.
List of Cons of the No Child Left Behind Act
1. Doubts of the Acts Effectiveness
In the eyes of the opponents of the NCLB, which include major teachers’ unions, the act has not been effective in improving education in the public arena, especially in high schools, as proven by combined results of standardized tests since the act’s inception.
2. Federal Underfunding
During the Bush Administration, the NCLB was significantly underfunded at the state level, but still required the states to comply with all its provisions or risk losing federal funds. As stated by Senator Ted Kennedy, who was the Senate Education Committee Chair and a sponsor of NCLB, “The tragedy is that these long overdue reforms are finally in place, but the funds are not.” This resulted to most states being constrained to make budget cuts in non-tested school subjects, such as foreign languages, science, art and social studies, as well as in school supplies, books and field trips.
3. Bias and Deep Flaws
Opponents claim that standardized tests, which are the center of NCLB accountability, is biased and deeply flawed for many reasons. Also, the stricter qualifications for teachers have exacerbated the teacher shortage across the country and have not provided a stronger pool of teachers.
4. More Focus on Test Scores
Many teachers and parents arrogate that the NCLB encourages children to score well on their tests, instead of teaching them the primary goal of learning. Consequently, teachers are compelled to teach narrow sets of test-taking skills and a test-limited knowledge range.
5. Lack of Constitutional Authority by the Government Over Education
Some critics believe that the federal government lacks the constitutional authority in the field of education and that it erodes local and state control over educating children.
6. Very High Teacher Qualification Standards
The NCLB sets very high qualifications for teachers, like requiring them to possess one or more college degrees in particular subjects and to pass a battery of proficiency tests. These new requirements have caused huge problems with getting qualified teachers in certain subjects, such as math, science and special education, and certain areas, such as rural, inner cities, where school districts are already experiencing teacher shortages. Moreover, teachers strongly object to the Bush Administration’s proposal in 2007 to allow districts to circumvent their contracts to transfer them to poorly performing or failing schools.
7. Failure to Address Reasons for Lack of Achievement
At its core, the NCLB faults curriculum and the schools themselves for student failure. However, critics claim that there are other factors to blame, including old and damaged school buildings, class size, homelessness, hunger and lack of health care.
The No Child Left Behind Act has definitely changed the procedures and standards disadvantaged students in public schools, requiring the states to develop basic assessments of students each year to see their level of development. However, this change in policies did come as quite a shock to teachers, students and parents alike. On your part, do you think it really benefited the children in the US or do you think it has become more of a hindrance?
Plea bargaining is an agreement used in criminal cases to avoid a lengthy trial. Here, the prosecutor and the defendant work together to agree with each other, instead of taking the litigation to a jury. It often includes things like pleading to a lesser charge and pleading guilty in exchange for a lighter sentence. It is highly common in the US, where many cases are settled through plea bargains than by trials.
This type of legal agreement enables both parties to avoid a prolonged trial under court and enables the defendant to avoid the risk of a guilty verdict at court, which can lead to a more severe sentence. Plea bargaining has been carried out as an intentional agreement that leaves the defendant and the prosecutor better off, in which the former have various procedural and substantive rights. However, if the defendant pleads accountable, he is trading his rights to a prosecutor in return for concessions that are highly respected than surrendered rights. Withal, plea bargaining has become a hot topic in debates whether it is good for the society or not. To get a good idea on this subject, let us take a look at its advantages and disadvantages.
List of Advantages of Plea Bargaining
1. It helps deal with case loads.
In plea bargaining, the state and the court are aided in dealing with case loads. Also, the process decreases the prosecutors’ work load by letting them prepare for more serious cases by leaving effortless and petty charges in order to settle through.
2. It makes trial scheduling uncongested.
For the judge, the key benefit of accepting a plea bargain agreement is that he can alleviate the need to schedule and hold the trial on a docket that is already overcrowded. Judges are also aware of overcrowding in jails, so they might be receptive to process out offenders who are unlikely to do much jail time anyway. This means cases will be closed much quicker, which is good for the society as the method de-clogs court systems for more serious cases.
3. It hastens the process of trials.
Plea bargains are a significant factor in restructuring offenders by letting them agree to the blame for their trial and by letting them voluntarily submit before the law—without having expensive and time-consuming trials.
4. It eliminates a case’s uncertainty.
From the criminal defense’s perspective, the most useful benefit of this type of agreement is its ability to remove the uncertainty of a trial. It helps defendants with making sure they will not receive more serious charges for the criminal acts filed against them.
5. It brings great possibility to find the accused guilty.
When it does happen that the prosecution is feeble or that the court wants proper witnesses or evidence, and the outcome is likely acquittal, it is possible that the prosecuting party will still find the accused guilty.
6. It prevents a case from getting worse.
When a charged individual takes a plea bargain, he will not have to go through trial. This means that some crimes, which may have been committed, and any damning evidence are not going to be discovered.
7. It does not allow maximum sentence.
One of the biggest reasons why many people opt for plea bargaining is the fact that they cannot receive maximum sentences for their crimes.
8. It may allow for aiding larger cases.
In a plea bargaining agreement, prosecutors will often roll other conditions for the defendants to testify against a co-defendant, which might help solve larger cases in a prosecution.
9. It lets the justice system breathe.
If all criminal cases should make it to a trial by jury, then our justice systems would not be able to sustain themselves. Courts will probably be backed up by months or even years.
List of Disadvantages of Plea Bargaining
1. It allows presentation of the accused with unconscionable pressure.
In a plea bargaining agreement, the prosecution can present the accused with unconscionable pressure. And even though the process is controlled, there is still a chance of it being coerced.
2. It can lead to poor case preparation and investigations.
Some judges and attorneys argue that plea bargaining has led to attorneys not taking the time to properly prepare their cases and poor police investigations. They believe that, rather than pursuing justice, the parties would rely on making a deal, where the details of what happened and their legal consequences will become less important.
3. It might be biased to the prosecution party.
Plea bargaining might allow prosecutors to take full advantage of accepting criminal acts in the weakest trials. The more beneficial will be a guilty claim for the prosecution is if the trial ends in acquittal.
4. It might charge innocent people guilty.
Even if you are innocent, but agreed to a guilty plea, you still have to pay a fine or be imprisoned for a crime you did not commit. Not only this, but you will also have a criminal record that cannot be erased.
5. It is unconstitutional.
It is argued that plea bargaining is unconstitutional, as it takes away the defense’s constitutional right to a trial by jury. If the defendant is pressured or coerced into such an agreement, then this argument may have a considerable weight. But if the defendant, at all times in the criminal case, retains his right to a trial by jury without pressure to make an agreement, then the court finds that this procedure remains constitutional.
6. It can make the justice system suffer.
Since both the defense and prosecution parties depend on their power to negotiate a deal, instead of winning a trial, the justice system might suffer.
If both parties agree on a plea bargain, then the agreement shall be stated clearly on the court record before a judge who will issue the sentence that is agreed upon. Plea bargaining can have benefits for defendants and for the society, whose interests are represented by the government prosecutor. However, it is always important that both the prosecution and defending parties carefully weigh their options before reaching an agreement through a plea bargain.
Debate on whether military draft is necessary has been on-going for years with proponents and opponents belonging in all walks of life expressing their points of view. Contentions about serving one’s country voluntarily or mandatorily have been brought up and discussed in different platforms. Some supporters are saying military draft should return because what of what it can contribute to the nation and the citizenry.
What Is a Military Draft?
Also known as conscription, it is a system that requires individuals between 18-25 years old to enlist and serve in the military if they are eligible to join the service after assessment. Drafted men and women will undergo months of training and be sent to wars or assigned to designations in the military.
While there are some who are supporters, there are non-conformists as well. Here are some of the advantages and disadvantages of mandatory enlistment in the military people are talking about.
List of Pros of Military Draft
1. It assures national security.
With strengthening the number of service men and women to defend the country when national security is put on the line, the country will be safer. There will be enough soldiers to fight in times of war, be it a civil war or one where many countries are involved. Since having casualties is inevitable, it is best to have other soldiers to replace those who will be injured or killed in the battle and a military draft can make this possible.
2. It is contributory to building character.
Military draft is for people 18 years old and above and most of the draftees belong to the youth. This experience will teach them to be respectful of authority, enhance their leadership skills and have self-discipline. These are character traits they can use even after military service and throughout their lives. Moreover, young people will learn how to take on great responsibilities not only to the community but to the nation and the world.
3. It can reduce unemployment in the long run.
As drafted soldiers, men and women will be taught skills and given training in engineering, IT and the like since they will be assigned to different departments and given duties from cooking to driving. After they are done serving the military, they can use these newly learned skills and expertise when they go back to the real world and seek employment.
4. It is a great way to travel and learn new cultures.
One of the benefits of being drafted in the military is the opportunity given to people to travel the world and learn about other countries and cultures. Soldiers are sent to war-stricken countries as well nations in need of relief and help. The experiences they gain from meeting other nationalities and at the same time helping other people enrich them as human beings. They gain knowledge and learn about compassion.
5. It creates equality and diversity.
In conscription, there is no rich or poor, no social status to take into consideration since everyone who is eligible will be included in the list. People, especially the youth will learn how to mingle with other people from all walks of life, with no special treatment whatsoever. They will learn about equality. Sons and daughters of leaders and children of ordinary citizens will be treated fairly and at the same level.
6. With children of politicians included in a military draft, there will be no abrupt decisions in getting into war.
Some powerful countries with sufficient weaponry and resources often are too eager to strike and threaten smaller countries. However, if their sons and daughters are in military service, they will think twice before instigating war with other nations. This will avoid unnecessary wars and save more lives. Instead, leaders will be more diplomatic in their decisions.
7. It cuts down expenses of the government to have enlisted soldiers than an all-volunteer force.
With people mandated to military service, there is no need to spend for convincing them to join by way of giving free tuition for college, salaries and sign-up bonuses. These are some of the expenses the government will incur with recruiting men and women to volunteer as soldiers.
List of Cons of Military Draft
1. It takes away precious time from the youth.
One of the disadvantages of military draft which critics are pointing out is the time that will be lost by the young men and women forced to join the military. They say that the years spent in the military will affect their transition from high school to college.
2. Not all drafted soldiers are as competent as professional soldiers.
Opponents say that professional soldiers spend years of training especially for combat. They have enough time to train physically and emotionally unlike drafted soldiers who only get months of training with inefficient training courses.
3. Compulsory service in the military creates more expenses for the government.
Another disadvantage of conscription, according to groups that are against military draft, is the cost of having to train a large number of people especially if the country is not in imminent threat. Aside from the direct expenses, there are other expenditures conscription entails, not to mention the work force that is lost during the service.
4. It is one of the ways to strengthen militarism which should be avoided.
Those who are opposed to military draft has expressed concerns that forcing people to join the military, regardless of the social status, is imposing militarism on the society. Case in point, if professionals like engineers, lawyers and doctors are drafted, even the lowest ranking soldier will be superior to them. This is what opponents are not agreeable with. Moreover, even if a lawyer or a professional is called to serve for a few months, his or her educational background might not be of much help given the short time of service.
5. Not all drafted soldiers are members of the youth but older individuals with family.
For some critics, the number of young people does not constitute all soldiers in the military draft. There are husbands and wives with children and families left behind. In the end, it is the family that suffers.
Political leaders aim to protect their countries and defend their territories from enemies. However, is military draft the only solution? Should citizens be forced to risk their lives to fight for their country? Leaders should take into consideration the benefits and drawbacks of military draft and see if the good effects outweigh the bad.
The ongoing contentions about the importance of homework have been in discussion for years among educators, parents and students. There are parents and educators who support this practice but there are also those who are not in favor of making students do extra school work at home. There are even some countries that implement a no homework policy. Is homework really an integral part of learning?
List of Pros of Homework
1. It makes up for the insufficient time children spend in school to learn.
Proponents say that giving school children activities to do at home can offer them more time to master a subject. Teachers give school assignments to students on the lessons they have tackled in the classroom to assess if students have understood what was learned from academic subjects like Math, Physics and English. Advocates of homework believe the time spent in school to learn is not always sufficient and letting students spend extra time to solve problems and learn new vocabulary words is crucial to their learning . It also serves as a foundation for further learning that students will benefit from in the long run.
2. It is an effective way for students to learn discipline.
People who support the giving of homework to students is a way to teach young individuals and growing children discipline since they will have to learn how to focus and set aside unimportant activities to prioritize finishing the tasks they have to submit the following day. For homework supporters, not giving students school work at home might make them derelict with their studies and be lazy.
3. Mastery of knowledge and skills depend on practice.
Aside from the time allotted for students to learn during class hours, continuing their learning at home can enhance what they already know. Take home activities give students more time to practice. Homework given to college and high school students give them more time to master their subjects and absorb the teachings of their professors and teachers.
4. Parents can see what their children are doing in school and help with the homework as well.
Another benefit of homework is to both the parents and students. If students have school work to do at home, parents will be able to see the kind of education their kids are getting. They are assured their children are into their studies and are really learning from school. Moreover, this can be a bonding time between parents and children especially if they will be able to help their kids with their homework and school projects.
5. It can instill good study habits and reduce time spent on watching television and playing video games.
By giving students projects and take home assignments, students, especially the younger ones can acquire good study habits at an early age. With the evolution of technology and the myriad of gadgets and computer games to keep children distracted, it is best to give them something worthwhile to do so they can understand the importance of studying and learn to like it as well. Moreover, they will be motivated to use their gadgets and computers for studying and research instead of spending hours playing video games, checking their Facebook accounts and watching television on end.
6. It prepares them for the real world once they finish education.
By giving homework, children will learn to be responsible, solve problems, analyze, manage their time and take on responsibilities. The skills they learn from school are the same skills they will need when they start their independence and be young adults. Proponents are firm in saying that when these kids become adults and be members of the workforce or even be entrepreneurs themselves, they will be using what they have or not have learned while studying. Extra time spent at home for doing school work can help them overcome the challenges they will face when they get out of the real world.
List of Cons of Homework
1. It can be stressful for the student especially for young kids.
Critics argue that homework given to students especially the younger school children are too much to handle. If this is the case, homework can be a stressor instead of a motivator. If bombarded with lessons at school and even at home, children might lose interest and worse, dread school days. This is a concern that bothers some parents and even educators.
2. It is not as effective as proponents say it is.
Some opponents say that homework is not a guarantee that students will master skills and absorb what they learned from school. They say that some parents or tutors are the ones doing the homework instead of the students. If this is the case, giving homework is irrelevant when it comes to knowledge enhancement. They also point out that there are students with parents to help them with their school projects and there are those who don’t have parents to guide them which make homework an uneven playing filed for students.
3. Homework does not necessarily result to improving school performance.
For opponents, homework gives less or no benefit when it comes to motivating students to improve performance in school. They oppose what proponents are saying that there is a positive correlation between homework and how students perform in school for the reason that not all students have equal levels of intelligence. What might be helpful and easy for students who are good in a certain subject might be useless and difficult to students who have different levels of intelligence.
4. It can be a burden to students, especially younger kids.
With all the activities in school, both academic and extracurricular, students, specifically the young ones, are already tired when they get home. Having to solve difficult math problems, memorize long lines or read several chapters can be tiresome for them. Not only will they end up staying up late but they might not be able to absorb anything.
Both proponents and opponents have presented rational and acceptable views about homework. While it can be an effective way to master the skills of students, too much homework can also drain the minds of students. Perhaps one question needs to be answered. How much homework should a student has to be given? In the end, it is best to assess the student’s level of learning and give homework accordingly.
Genetically modified (GM) foods are organisms that have had new genes added to themselves from other organisms. Being around since 1994, they are produced in a way that is very similar to genetic engineering. The technique used in this type of crop management has been introduced to ensure farmers and merchants are able to improve crop or food quality in a more efficient way. Some people arrogate that this technology will help those in the agricultural industry decrease the amount of wasted crops and foods. But while there are many benefits of genetically modified foods, there are also potential drawbacks that are present. Here are their advantages and disadvantages:
List of Advantages of Genetically Modified Foods
1. Insect Resistance
Some GMO foods have been modified to make them more resistant to insects and other pests. A report from the University of California in San Diego states that toxic bacteria (yet safe for human use) can be added to crops to make them repel insects. This means the amount of pesticide chemicals used on the plants are reduced, so their exposure to dangerous pesticides are also reduced.
2. Stronger Crops
Another benefit that GM technology is believed to bring about is that crops can be engineered to withstand weather extremes and fluctuations, which means that there will be good quality and sufficient yields even under a poor or severe weather condition. As populations across the world grow and more lands are being utilized for housing instead of food production, farmers are prompted to grow crops in locations that are originally not suitable for plant cultivation, and culturing plants that can withstand high salt content in soil and groundwater, not to mention long periods of drought, will help them grow healthy crops. Also, animals and plants that have been genetically modified can become more resistant to unexpected disease problems. We can just think of the technology as a vaccine for the species, except that it is encoded into their genes, rather than being shot into their immune system.
3. Larger Production
It has been easier to raise crops that are classified as genetically modified because all of their examples have the stronger ability to resist pests. This attribute helps farmers with producing greater amounts of crops or foods.
4. Environmental Protection
According to an Oklahoma State University report, the increase of GM animals and crops often requires less time, tools and chemicals, and may help with reducing greenhouse gas emissions, soil erosion and environmental pollution. This means the general health and beauty of the environment that surrounds farms will be improved, contributing to the preservation of better water and air quality, which can also indirectly benefit every person’s well-being.
5. Extensive Protection for Crops
GM foods were created with the use of genetic engineering—a technology that was designed to make sure crops will never be damaged in a fast rate. The method also allows farmers and merchants to preserve the good quality of foods more efficiently by using special substances.
6. More Nutritious Foods
According to the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, some GM foods have been engineered to become more nutritious in terms of vitamin or mineral content. This not only helps people get the nutrients they need, but also plays a significant role in fighting against malnutrition in third-world countries. In fact, the United Nations recommends that rice that is enhanced with vitamin A can help with reducing deficiencies of such nutrient around the world.
7. Decreased Use of Pesticides
It has been proven that genetically modified crops do not need pesticides to become stronger against various types of insects or pests that may destroy them.
8. More Income
With genetic engineering, farmers will have more income, which they could spend on important things, such as the education of their children for example.
9. Less Deforestation
To sufficiently feed the growing population of the world, deforestation is needed. But with genetically modified animals and crops, the use of this method will be minimized. This would decrease carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which would, in turn, slow global warming.
10. Decrease in Global Warming
As more plants and crops can be grown and at more areas, including those that were previously unsuitable for farming, oxygen in the environment is increased, decreasing the proportion of carbon dioxide and, in turn, reducing global warming. In fact, British economists noted in a study that genetically modified crops have made significant contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by over 10 million tons, which is equivalent to removing 5 million cars from the road each year. This means that people would not have to give up their vehicles.
11. Decrease in Food Prices
Due to higher yield and lower costs, food prices would go down. As people in poorer countries spend over half of their income on food alone, this means automatic reduction of poverty.
12. New Products
New kinds of crops are being developed to be grown at extreme climates, such as those present in dry or freezing environments. As an example, scientists have developed a new type of tomato that grows in salty soil. Another good discovery in genetic engineering of plants is the exclusion of the gene responsible for caffeine in coffee beans, creating decaffeinated coffee beans, which can then be grown naturally.
List of Disadvantages of Genetically Modified Foods
1. Allergic Reactions
According to research by the Brown University, resent genetically modified foods can pose significant allergy risks to people. It states that genetic modification often adds or mixes proteins that were not indigenous to the original animal or plant, which might cause new allergic reactions in our body. In some cases, proteins from organisms that you are allergic to might be added to organisms that you were not originally allergic to. This means your range of food choices will be lessened.
2. Not 100% Environmentally Friendly
Though it is claimed by many experts that genetically modified foods are safe for the environment, they actually still contain several kinds of substances that are not yet proven to be such. And what’s worse? These substances are remained hidden to the public.
3. Lower Level of Biodiversity
One big potential drawback of this technology is that some organisms in the ecosystem could be harmed, which in turn could lead to a lower level of biodiversity. When we remove a certain pest that is harmful to crops, we could also be removing a food source for a certain species. In addition, genetically modified crops could prove toxic to some organisms, which can lead to their reduced numbers or even extinction.
4. Decreased Antibiotic Efficacy
According to the Iowa State University, some genetically modified foods have antibiotic features that are built into them, making them resistant or immune to viruses or diseases or viruses. And when we eat them, these antibiotic markers will persist in our body and will render actual antibiotic medications less effective. The university also warns that ingestion of these foods and regular exposure to antibiotics may contribute to the reduced effectiveness of antibiotic drugs, as noticed in hospitals across the planet.
5. Unusual Taste
Genetically modified foods are observed to have unnatural tastes compared with the ordinary foods that are sold on the market. This could be the result of the substances that were added to their composition.
6. Not Totally Safe to Eat
It is proven by scientific studies that GMO foods contain substances that may cause diseases and even death to several kinds of species in this world, including us humans. For instance, mice and butterflies cannot survive with these foods.
Cross-pollination can cover quite large distances, where new genes can be included in the offspring of organic, traditional plants or crops that are miles away. This can result in difficulty in distinguishing which crop fields are organic and which are not, posing a problem to the task of properly labeling non-GMO food products.
8. Gene Spilling
It is unclear what effects, if there are any, the genetic pollution resulting from inadequate sequestering of genetically modified crop populations would have on the wild varieties surrounding them. However, it is stressed that releasing pollen from genetically altered plants into the wild through the insects and the wind could have dramatic effects on the ecosystem, though there is yet long-term research to be done to gauge such impact.
9. Gene Transfer
Relevant to the previous disadvantage, a constant risk of genetically modified foods is that an organism’s modified genes may escape into the wild. Experts warn that genes from commercial crops that are resistant to herbicides may cross into the wild weed population, thus creating super-weeds that have become impossible to kill. For genetically enhanced vegetation and animals, they may become super-organisms that can out-compete natural plants and animals, driving them into extinction.
GMO foods can cause a lot of issues in the merchants’ daily life. How? These products might encourage authorities to implement higher tariffs to merchants, who would be selling them.
Some countries may use genetic engineering of foods as a very powerful weapon against their enemies. It is important to note that some scientists have discovered that these products can kill a lot of individuals in the world by using harmful diseases.
12. Widening Gap of Corporate Sizes
This disadvantage can possibly happen between food-producing giants and their smaller counterparts, causing a consolidation in the market. There would be fewer competitors, which could increase the risk of oligopolies and food price increases. Moreover, larger companies might have more political power and might be able to influence safety and health standards.
13. New Diseases
As previously mentioned, genetically modified foods can create new diseases. Considering that they are modified using viruses and bacteria, there is a fear that this will certainly happen. This threat to human health is a worrisome aspect that has received a great deal of debate.
14. Food Supply at Risk
GMO seeds are patented products and, in order to purchase them, customers have to sign certain agreements for use with the supplier or creator. As the reliance on these seeds expands around the world, concerns about food supply and safety also continue to arise. Furthermore, these seeds structurally identical, and if a problem affects one of them, a major crop failure can occur.
15. Economic Concerns
Bringing a genetically modified food to market can be a costly and lengthy process, and of course, agricultural bio-technology companies want to ensure a profitable ROI. So, many new plant genetic engineering technologies and products have been patented, and patent infringement is a big concern within the agribusiness. Also, consumer advocates are worried that this will raise seed prices to very high levels that third-world countries and small farmers cannot afford them, thus widening the gap between the rich and the poor.
One way fight against possible patent infringement is introducing a “suicide gene” into GM animals and plants, which would be viable for only a single growing season and would produce sterile seeds that do not germinate, prompting farmers to buy a fresh supply of seeds every year. However, this would be financially disastrous for them, especially those in developing countries, who cannot afford to do this and traditionally set aside a portion of their harvest to plant in the next growing season.
Genetically modified foods can potentially solve many hunger and malnutrition problems in the world, as well as help protect and preserve the environment by increasing yields and reducing reliance upon chemical pesticides and herbicides. However, it is important to proceed with caution to avoid unfavorable consequences for the surroundings and our health, considering that genetic engineering technology is very powerful.
Remember that there are really potential benefits and risks to these products, which you will learn further as you dig deeper into this subject. You can also read a brief fact sheet to familiarize yourself more with their purported benefits and problems. By doing so, you will be well-informed about these foods and the way they can affect your life.
Flat organizational structure is an organizational model with few or (in most cases) no levels of middle management between the executives and the staff level employees. It was designed with the idea that knowledgeable and well-trained workers will be more productive when they are directly involved in the decision making process of the organization, rather than being supervised by many management layers. In other words, employee involvement is promoted by decentralizing the decision-making process and elevating the levels of responsibility of employees. With this organizational structure, customer comments and feedback will reach all the personnel involved in the decision faster, enabling the company or organization to make a rapid response to customer feedback.
Often times, you will see this model used in very small businesses, where there is a lack of middle managers because there are too few employees to handle. In a small boutique shop, for example, the business owner or business head may perform some of the functions that middle managers in hierarchical organizations perform. Some companies, even when they have already grown or expanded retain a flat structure. This is especially true in those organizations with self-managing teams, where individual staff organizes and performs their own work without the need for close supervision.
Then, of course, flat organizational structure is for everyone. Startups and small business should weight its advantages and disadvantages before deciding to implement it in their own business.
List of Advantages of a Flat Organizational Structure
1. It Is Cost Efficient
As mentioned, in this organizational structure, there are fewer (or no) manager layers between the executive and the staff. This means that there are less wages, fringe benefits, and so on, to pay for management. Salary-related expenses are reduced, enabling the company to save money as well as provide better pay for its workers.
2. It Promotes Faster Decision Making
Another advantage about a flat organizational structure is there are less decision-making hoops. Fewer people have to be consulted about a decision, allowing the management to provide rapid response to any issues or concern. It creates a direct communication line between the person sitting behind the desk (the owner or CEO) and the people on the front line (the workers).
3. It Allows Clear Communication
What usually happens when information is passed on through a series of ears and mouths is that it ended up either distorted, puffed up, or deflated. When communication is passed across many management layers, there is a high chance of miscommunication. Flat organizational structure helps avoid this by allowing the upper management to take direct input from employees, and vice versa.
4. It Requires Less Dominance and Supervision
Many believe that a company’s head must be able to monitor and manage anything and everything that is happening inside his or her organization, including the employees. Some studies, however, show otherwise. This is because the less time managers have to helicopter and micromanage their employees, the more productive employees can get in day as these can give them a higher sense of responsibility.
List of Disadvantages of a Flat Organizational Structure
So, we have already pointed out the advantages of a flat organizational structure. Let us now take a look at its limitations.
1. Management Can Easily Lose Control
As mentioned above, this structure is ideal for startups and small business where the number of employees is still manageable. The system can pose a problem to the whole organization when the ratio of employees to managers become too out of proportion. The management can easily lose control when there are less people to put a brake to bad behaviors and less individuals to support or back them up on their decisions.
2. Work-Relationship Could Struggle
When managers have too many people to manage every day, they may find it difficult to connect with their employees on a personal level, which is crucial in maintaining trust and in stepping up the baseline of employees’ responsibility and accountability for the work and the organization as a whole. This con can have a great impact on the issue of respect and morale of an organization on levels of authority.
3. It Can Create Power Struggle
Under this organizational structure, it is observed that employees often lack a specific boss to report to, especially when the owner or CEO is not around. This can create confusion and possible power struggles among management employees.
4. It Makes Employee Retention Difficult
Who does not want a promotion? Excellent employees who are looking for an improvement in their rank, aside from an increase in their salary, may find it hard to find job satisfaction in this kind of organizational set up. They may end up looking for a job somewhere else where they believe their efforts will be rewarded with a promotion.
5. It May Hinder Growth
Change is often times difficult and poses a lot of what ifs. Because of this, management may decide against new opportunities in an effort to maintain the structure which, as a result, may limit the long-term growth of the organization.
6. There Is Less Motivation
While a flat organization structure may lessen the problems caused by unhealthy competition among employees, it makes it harder for ambitious workers to move up the ladder as there is very little room up there. This could easily erode motivation, giving people no reason to take the extra mile in their work.
7. Can Result to Role Confusion
An employee may go to work for a flat organization expecting to fulfill a defined role, but find out later that he or she needs to do many pieces of other jobs. This makes it hard for workers to focus on their tasks and specialize at their jobs.
Like many other organizational structures, the flat organization structure also has its share of advantages and disadvantages. Whether or not it is for your business, it depends on the size and type of your company. Thus, carefully consider the pros and cons discussed above before adopting this structure in your own organization.
With the evolution of technology, the lives of people became more convenient and faster. Business owners have made use of computers and the World Wide Web to operate virtually, thus making it a crucial element in thriving in the industry.
In technology, virtualization is the use of virtual or unreal version of resources such as devices or computer platforms which can be used in different applications. It can be a storage device, a network or an operating system. Partitioning a hard drive into several partitions can be considered virtualization as well as having a host computer to run several guest computers. It can be likened to the brain and the mind, wherein the former is the physical device while the latter is a virtual brain. In recent years, the term visualization has broadened and can now be classified into the following:
Hardware Virtualization – also referred to as platform virtualization, this entails creating a virtual machine that work similarly as a real computer.
Desktop Virtualization – is a more advanced form of hardware virtualization wherein connection can be to the host server without the use of a keyboard, monitor and a moue but instead through remote access via local access networking (LAN), the internet or Wireless LAN.
With this advance in technology, people can now enhance their computer experience by centralizing their activities with the use of different devices and computer platforms. Indeed, there are numerous benefits virtualization offers but there are also opposing views about its effects.
Here is an analysis of the positive and negative effects of this innovation in technology:
List of the Advantages of Virtualization
1. It reduces IT costs and business expenditure.
With the advent of virtual computing, business can take advantage of lessening their expenses in these three areas:
Capital Expenditure – With virtualization, a business owner need not have to invest in several units of computer hardware to run the business. By investing in a host server, different transactions can be made using virtual machines.
Energy Expenditure – With less investment in hardware, there will be a reduction in the consumption of energy which can impact the cost of utility bills in the business.
Operational Expenses – With the use of virtual machines, more work can be accomplished in a short period of time and faster. This way, employees get their tasks done within the shift and there is no need to go overtime which can be an added expense to overhead costs.
2. It allows businesses to consolidate their resources, thus reducing costs.
A great thing about virtualization is it capability to allow businesses to use several applications in a server instead of several servers. Unlike older computer networking infrastructure types which do not typically permit this set-up, virtual computing can run multiple servers in a single host.
3. It prevents unnecessary downtime since it makes it possible for business owners to make the most of its resources.
With virtualization, computer environments can be maximized, allowing for the unused servers to be used since workload can be spread. In situations where new servers are needed, it can be done with just a simple click and no need to spend for new hardware so long as there are adequate resources. This is great for small business and for start-ups which utilize data for testing and tests.
4. Data recovery is faster and cost-efficient.
Overtime, files can be corrupted. In the virtual platform, recovering data is faster and a breeze. With the use of a virtual backup, corrupted systems and files can be deleted and restored using the backup.
5. It can be used by health care personnel to render services to patients.
Another application of virtualization that has also been discussed in health care is the use of virtual computing for the use of medical and administrative staff online to access medical records and orders by doctors. This also reduced the cost of hospitals when it comes to maintenance and help desk calls.
List of Disadvantages of Virtualization
1. It can be expensive.
One of the setbacks of virtualization is the cost. According to the CEO of an IT consulting firm, this can be quite a pricey investment upfront. A virtual server needs a one-time investment that is more than the cost of a conventional server. An entrepreneur who wants faster performance of tasks using technology might consider having to pay a little more to create virtual servers than upgrading new software and servers.
2. Virtualization might not be compatible with other servers and applications.
Another drawback is the possibility that not all servers and applications are virtualization friendly. This can be a problem when an investment has already been made on several servers or if the applications used to run your business do not have an upgraded version that allows for virtualization.
3. It needs training to network administrators and in the case of hospitals, additional trainings for personnel.
Another downside of virtualization is the need to spend for training for the network administrator which is an added expense. In the case of hospital personnel, the management will have to shoulder the expenses for training doctors, nurses and administrative staff. Moreover, not all personnel are ready to learn new computer skills especially those who are not technically savvy. This can pose as a challenge.
4. Added expense from easy server installation.
Another problem seen by opponents of virtualization is the impending concern that since adding new servers can be done faster and a time might come when there are more servers than network administrators available to monitor them. This means impractical expenditure and waste of time.
Virtualization has indeed come of age and will still be popular in the coming years. This technical platform has already showed its effectiveness and benefit especially in businesses. And though there are also downsides to utilizing this system, the advantages clearly outweigh the disadvantages. It is up to private individuals and the business owners to decide on up to what extent is virtualization allowed to run people’s lives and businesses.
In 1994, Oregon was the first state to express the legalization of Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS) with the voters approving Measure 16 which subsequently enacted Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, also referred to as Physician-Assisted Dying (PAD). Implementation of the Act was put on hold, however, due to an injunction but was eventually lifted in 1997.
List of Pros of the Death with Dignity Act
1. It gives a person the right to die.
Proponents say that a terminally ill person who wants to end his or her suffering has the right to choose whenever he or she wants to die and should be spared from excruciating pain caused by the illness. They add that this is the same as a person’s right to live, get married, have children and refuse medical treatment if he or she deem appropriate. If the state prohibits this, it is similar to curtailing a person’s right to liberty.
2. It ends a dying person’s end-of-life suffering.
Advocates of this Act say that people who are suffering from terminal illnesses are looking for individuals like Jack Kevorkian to end their misery. They believe that Americans should be given the right not to suffer in connection to the European Declaration of Human Rights. For them, not allowing a dying person with sound mind to put an end to suffering is a criminal act with equal bearing with taking a person’s life without his or her permission.
3. It gives an individual self-autonomy in terms of making decisions about one’s life as opposed to withdrawing life support of a dying patient.
Proponents of PAD express that with this practice, a person is given the right to decide on his or her own if he or she wants to stop prolonging his suffering by being on life support which does not really cure or improve quality of life. They also added that putting someone on life support without consent is far worse.
4. It does not replace end-of-life care.
Allowing a person with terminal illness who has six months to live to spend the last days doing things he or she loves, choosing when he or she wants to die and dying in the comfort of his or her home, surrounded by loved ones is what the Die with Dignity Act entails. Patients can still have palliative care but not in a hospital, if this is what he or she prefers.
List of Cons of the Death with Dignity Act
1. It goes against the Hippocratic Oath to do no harm.
Opponents of the Act say that prescribing medication that will cause the death of a person, regardless if the individual had asked for it is against the Hippocratic Oath, particularly the part where it states, “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it nor will I make a suggestion to this effect”.
2. It will force dying patients to end life for fear of being a burden to family.
There are patients who have been diagnosed with long-term illnesses and elderly people alike who feel their loved ones are suffering from taking care of them as well as from financial crises for the expenses they incur from hospitalization and continuous care. With a law allowing for choosing one’s time of death, these patients or elderly might feel guilty and would want to just end their loves so as not to be a burden to their families. This issue, along with some concerns about family members coercing a terminally ill patient to request for PAD, is also one of the reasons why some people oppose the Dignity of Dying Act.
3. It is morally unethical.
Opposition against the Act also come from religious and moral leaders who believe that taking the life of someone or aiding a person to end his or life is not morally correct and go against the doctrine of the Catholic church, in particular. For religious and moral advocates, life is a gift from God, which mankind does not have dominion over.
4. It can be abused for monetary gains by unscrupulous individuals.
By making it legally lawful for a physician to prescribed lethal drugs to any person who is of legal age and is competent, family members who have vested interest might fool a dying patient to sign the document even without his or her understanding just so they can get their inheritance.
What Does Physician-Assisted Dying Mean?
This refers to a physician prescribing medication with lethal dose to a terminally ill patient who wishes to end his or suffering by dying at a time he or she prefers. Here, the patient will be the one administering the medication at a time he or she chooses. Before it became a law in Oregon, it was referred to as Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS). However, some groups did not approve of the term, arguing that a person who commits suicide is regarded as an individual with impaired judgment. A terminally ill patient, on the contrary, still has sound judgment but prefers to end his or her. Therefore, the former is someone who needs intervention to stop him or her to commit suicide while a dying patient should be supported on his or her will to end suffering.
There are at least five states in the United States that support the Death with Dignity Act either as an enacted law or a ruling of court. Oregon, Washington and Vermont states made the Act a law in 1997, 2009 and 2013, respectively while the state of New Mexico sees it as a constitutional right of a dying patient to request for lethal dose of medication following a court ruling by a judge in 2014. The state of Montana, on the other hand, does not have a law which is pro PAD but acknowledges that a physician is not to be charged for prescribing a lethal medication to a patient who requests for one.
The on-going debate has been present for years now, although according to some reports, more Americans are now expressing their approval on allowing a terminally ill patient dignified death. Different issues have been raised ethically, morally and legally with both proponents and opponents stating their views on the advantages and disadvantages of the Act.
Whether the Death with Dignity Act is for protecting one’s right to self-autonomy or a case of abuse, there will always be contentions about the issue. There will be varying points of view from people. The pros and cons of this Act is an unending debate. In the end, it is still the individual who knows what he or she believes in.
The “Right to Bear Arms” is the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution, which became a law collectively with the 9 amendments composing the Bill of Rights. The commandment it holds states that “Well governed armed forces, which are vital to provide security and protection to the independent State, shall not disobey the natural right of a person to bear arms,” proclaiming the militias to recognize completely citizens’ rights. While there are benefits to it, there are also drawbacks. To get a well-informed insight of this law, let us take a look at its pros and cons.
List of Pros of the Right to Bear Arms
1. Symbol of Freedom
The individual right to carry arms is seen as an important symbol of individual freedom. In fact, it has become so important that it lasts expression to many people in the US of their individual liberty. There are few symbols as powerful, particularly as this right potentially allows citizens to join a militia and fight a tyrannical government. Much less tangible are the rights to free speech and religion, which lack the power and threat of violence as a check on government tyranny. This symbolic expression of freedom is resonating too deeply with many Americans for them to be deprived of it.
2. Personal Protection
With this law, people are permitted to own firearms for self defense or protection whenever they are physically or offensively attacked by other people. In fact, it does not corrupt protection power of citizens to save their selves and live a life free of harm.
3. Well-Regulated Militia
As mentioned above, the Right to Bear Arms secures its subjects the right of having arms for their defense, suitable to their degree and condition. In the construction of this law, owners are adhered to comply with the conditions to be responsible for the right they are given to. It even includes the field of hunting games. Certainly, we can reasonably hope that the people in this country will never cease to regard the right of keeping and bearing arms as the surest pledge of their liberty.
4. Better Individuals
This law enforces a requirement of firearm license, which can only be purchased after applicants undergo a background check that specifically scrutinizes the presence of a possible history of committed criminal cases. The Right to Bear Arms definitely excludes citizens who have a history of criminal acts against the community or a person.
It does not carelessly provide the right of a person to possess firearms. In fact, before one can purchase a gun, he has to go under a number of safety courses to verify the ability to own a gun harmlessly. Also, the public carrying of firearms is permitted if and only if the arms themselves are concealed. Convincing concealed gun permit should be obtained by the owner.
5. Tighter Controls of Guns
This means that there would less shooting. Taking into consideration what ordinary citizens and government officials claim, the fewer guns that are had, the less shooting will be. With such kind of restriction, cutting down on gun crimes can also made easier.
6. Type of Weapons You Have Should Be Negotiable
Mostly, gun control activists do not argue the right to own arms. However, they believe that stipulations to gun ownership should be placed but not made to be a limitation of the rights of the constituents.
7. Gun Control Does Not Need to Affect Law-Abiding Citizens
Gun control does not need to affect firearms that are used for legal purposes, where in fact, the latest technology allows the tracking of guns and ammo. The technology used also allows firearms to be traced back to their owners. Through this method, it will be simpler for law enforcers to recognize what happened if crimes are committed.
List of Cons of the Right to Bear Arms
1. High Costs
Usually, when you purchase a concealed gun permit to validate your ownership, it can be very costly. The said permit is not going to be free and can vary in prices in different states.
2. Irresponsible Gun Behavior
The Right to Bear Arms certainly includes a few flaws, such as in the case where the gun gets into the wrong hands like children who just do not understand how to use or manage it. As a consequence, accidents can happen. For a teenager, it might be a game, but it can kill in an instant. Aside from this, a gun can even be dangerous to older people, which is often observed if they are under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Even those who are known to be responsible can make the mistake of using a firearm when intoxicated.
3. More Risk of Violence
According to research, people carrying a gun for self-defense were 4.5 times more likely to be shot during an assault than those without a gun in the same situation. This means that firearms may not be the most reliable and effective form of self-defense.
Furthermore, many people claim that adults with guns are often not adequately trained, and there are some states that do not even require a lot of training for concealed gun ownership. Most importantly, the power of controlling the way owners would utilize their guns exceeds this law’s range of concern. Individuals who are committed with physical and emotional stress tend to be more vulnerable to extreme self-consciousness and anger, which most probably lead to homicide.
4. Higher Crime Rate
In contrast to crime rate reports by pro guns, there is research that found the Right to Bear Arms can lead to a higher crime rate. According to the research personnel, it appears that “shall-issue” laws had increased aggravated assaults between 1977 and 2006. Interestingly, reports about the connection between firearms and crime seem to contradict each other, but in one certain report, such laws increased rates of violent crime, rape and robbery.
In addition to crime, some even argue that firearms can increase suicide risk. In fact, in 2005, more than half the number of all suicides in the country involved a firearm. Not only do people believe that firearms can increase crime, but they also think that these guns can also increase suicide.
5. Nervous People Around
Many people claim that armed citizens are making other people very nervous, where there were reports that scared citizens were informing the police about suspicious people who are looking armed with a handgun. Also, some of them claim that it is difficult for the authorities to tell or distinguish normal responsible citizens who have legal firearms from criminals with firearms.
6. Armed Criminals
In contrast to how armed citizens will deter criminals from attacking them, there is the idea on armed citizens can encourage criminals to arm themselves . Criminals would arm themselves so that they can threaten armed citizens which in effect would deter them from resisting the attackers.
7. Danger and Lethality
One big issue with firearms is that they sometimes can be dangerous or can turn lethal, especially when a person is under the influence or intoxicated. Even adults who are responsible could make the mistake of having or using guns when intoxicated. In addition, the right to carry firearms can increase the chances of unintended shootings.
According to a study by Matthew Miller (PhD), Deborah Azrael (PhD) and David Hemenway (PhD), approximately 50 people are unintentionally shot every day in the US, and children under 14 years old die every other day from unintended gunfire. As you can see, even with responsible law abiding citizens owning guns, there can be a lot of tragic accidents if guns are not restricted.
The Right to Bear Arms has become a controversial section under the Bill of Rights that concerns the enforcement or prevention of acts that restricts people from keeping gun possession or complete a ban from owning one. The Second Amendment’s function is to guarantee people with their right to bear arms is limited. There are lots of federal laws that prohibit the ownership of guns and other firearms. The concerns about this law under the Bill of Rights greatly contradict several federal laws which, in this case, continue to be a controversial issue. Since the belief of one individual to another is different, we have to understand why some of us desire to carry weapons while others do not. Whether you are in favor of carrying weapons or not, you should determine its influence on your society. And to protect its citizens, a country would make its government officials to often prohibit carrying illegal firearms.
You should know that obtaining firearm ownership legally conveys a personal thought of both defending and protecting yourself, keeping you safe from offensive attacks. Remember that self protection is the basic unit of national protection, but though you are enjoying this right, abuse is possible to break other laws. Thus, a sense of responsibly obeying underlying rules that makes up this law and a measure of self control must always be exercised.