HW: Finish typing your midterm summary into your group’s Google Doc. Â Read “Youth Mode” by K-Hole as well as Michelle Nijhuis’ “The Pocket Guide to Bullshit Prevention” (both in Packet 2).
WRITING PROMPT:
Working with your Essay 2 group, create a new Google Doc for your essay. Â Make sure to share the document with everyone in the group as well as with me (street.monroe@gmail.com).
Once the Google Doc is created and shared, I want each of you to type a revised version of your midterm summary in the group’s document. Â Please paste a link your Google Doc below by Monday at 1p.
Revised midterm
The article “The truth about Deception online” by Krystal D’Costa states that online dating has become more popular, we use the network to have more friends and that people are getting out of control with cat fishing. Krystal D’Costa discusses that as online dating sites continue to grow, we are accepting to enter into online dating more. Krystal D ‘Costa says that “we choose what we believe to be the best of ourselves to share with others.” What I believe she is trying to say is that, when we post something online we always think of what kind of impression we are going to give to our viewers. Like if I like the color green but someone that I want to impress online does not like green, I won’t post that about myself. I’m not being myself instead I am choosing to share other things about me than what I truly am. Krystal D’Costa has that concept that the web has a reputation as a place where anonymity is permitted. I’ve seen it happen. Anyone can just make an account and pretend to be who they want to be, The internet is just a free place where you get to be who you want because it permitted.
With the article I can understand my word “catfish” even more since it has been going on for years. What I found most interesting in the article is the face that relationships have lasted just by online dating without meeting the person. The fact that you could put so much trust into messaging a person, without actually seeing who you are talking to. Something that I want to understand more is why we add people online that attended our class. For example you knew someone in high school but never spoke to them. We don’t even message them it’s just to have them as a friend online. I would want to understand, what’s the point of adding people we do not socialize with? What is the point of keeping up with them?
New Zealand’s Gun Laws Draw Scrutiny After Mosque Shootings
March 15, 2019
The police stood outside a mosque in central Christchurch, New Zealand, one of two mosques where a total of 49 people were gunned down on Friday.Mark Baker/Associated Press
The police stood outside a mosque in central Christchurch, New Zealand, one of two mosques where a total of 49 people were gunned down on Friday.Mark Baker/Associated Press
The shootings that killed at least 49 people at two mosques in New Zealand on Friday have placed new scrutiny on New Zealand’s gun laws and sparked a fervent debate about whether they were a factor in the gunman’s decision to carry out his attack there.
The man was identified in court papers as Brenton Harrison Tarrant, 28, and officials have said he was an Australian citizen, which has led to comparisons between gun laws in Australia and in New Zealand.
While New Zealand’s laws governing the purchase of semiautomatic rifles are more restrictive than those in the United States, the country is much freer with firearms than Australia is, allowing most guns to be purchased without requiring them to be tracked.
“New Zealand is almost alone with the United States in not registering 96 percent of its firearms — and those are its most common firearms, the ones most used in crimes,” said Philip Alpers of GunPolicy.org, a clearinghouse for gun law data worldwide. “There are huge gaps in New Zealand law, even if some of its laws are strong.”
New Zealand’s prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, said on Saturday that five firearms, including two semiautomatic weapons, were used in the attacks.
“If he went to New Zealand to commit these crimes,” Mr. Alpers said, “one can assume that the ease of obtaining these firearms may have been a factor in his decision to commit the crime in Christchurch.”
[Get the latest updates on the New Zealand terrorist attack here.]
In the years since a gunman killed 35 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania, in 1996, Australia has embarked on one of the world’s most expansive efforts to rid a society of gun violence. Officials significantly strengthened gun laws, severely restricted semiautomatic weapons and engaged in a buyback program that took more than 650,000 firearms off the streets.
The gun laws in New Zealand are more layered, and do not fit easily into a pro or anti-gun rubric.
Semiautomatic rifles and handguns, for example, require special licenses; a person can only buy one semiautomatic weapon at a time. “The police will look very askance at you if you want four or five of them,” Mr. Alpers said. “It gets harder and harder if you want more and more.” Still, Mr. Alpers said, it is possible to obtain a large cache of weapons — either by acting alone or if more than one person is purchasing.
As the law stands now, any person age 16 or older with an entry-level firearm license can keep any number of common rifles and shotguns without an official record of those guns being kept.
Most of the guns in circulation can be sold on the internet or through ads in newspapers, and the most popular types of firearms can lawfully change hands in private homes or even hotel parking lots with no requirement that a record of the transaction be kept.
Still, the country has generally been safe from gun massacres. Its last mass shooting, which left 13 people dead, was in 1990 — and it led to tighter rules around semiautomatic weapons.
Police officers do not generally carry firearms and murders are rare; the death toll from Friday’s terrorist attack is roughly equivalent to the number of murders that occur in the country each year. The annual tally of gun homicides specifically is even lower.
“New Zealanders are by and large safe users of firearms and that has led everybody to relax,” Mr. Alpers said. “It’s led New Zealanders to think they don’t have a problem.”
[The gunman appeared to be steeped in the culture of the extreme-right internet.]
At the same time, however, New Zealand’s gun culture is significant and deeply ingrained. Like the United States, Australia and Canada, New Zealand’s frontier history has led to a proliferation of guns used for sport, for protecting wide open spaces from animals, and for dealing with problems like wounded cattle.
Of the 3.9 million New Zealanders of gun licensing age, 238,000 — 6 percent — have a firearm license, according to GunPolicy.org.
“Our gun laws will change, now is the time,” Ms. Ardern said Saturday, though she did not say what that legislation would look like. “People will be seeking change, and I am committed to that.”
Mr. Alpers predicted that lawmakers would work to make guns harder to obtain.
“This will certainly change things in New Zealand,” he said. “I can’t think of a country that’s more likely to change its gun laws after something like this.”
A version of this article appears in print on March 16, 2019, on Page A12 of the New York edition with the headline: Gun Culture Of a Country Is Scrutinized After Attacks. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Sorry for the wrong post I lost the paper and I was thinking this was the the word without review the text.