Writing Feedback / Concealed Carry- do you agree or disagree. [5]

With the increase of crime rate, more and more people are realizing the importance of public and personal safety. Some people hold the idea of "concealed carry" (CC), which refers to "the practice of carrying a concealed weapon in public", while other is against the CC. Although, "the practice is controversial, particularly with respect to handguns", but can it really solve the problem of the high crime rate?

To increase the public safety by supporting CC is very childish. The comment of "criminals are less likely to attack a person if they assume the person is armed" is not always true. Some criminals are born to committee crimes without caring for the targets are armed or not. They are aggressively obsessed with more challengeble crime just for personal satisfaction and for fun. They may even think more interesting and feel more enjoyable to fight with a person who is armed. Even though some criminals may become more worried to attack a person who may have a handgun, they can always find a way around to committee crime anyhow. For example, they may switch to attack minors who probably are not mature enough to fire a gun, especially young children. We read the news of missing children almost every day, and I don't think applying CC will actually bring the missing- children news down. The society should rather teach those parents how to guard and protect their children and how to be more responsible, instead of supporting CC. If parents are more responsible and take good care of their own children, I believe that it will actually help reduce the criminal rates. "Having a gun allows one to protect oneself when actually attacked" is not always the case when those victims don't even know how to properly use a gun. People are not machinery designed and people do make mistakes. What about the victims accidently misfire and hurt other innocent people nearby? Should they also be blamed for creating the public fear and called criminals?

Furthermore, I am anti-CC. Having a CC will increase the criminal rate, because it will make more convenience for the criminals who want to use handguns when they are doing crime. Imagine what could have happened if the criminals pretend to be good citizens and concealed carry to public area. It would probably cause a chaos where people are getting injured both physically and emotionally. However, the damage could be avoided if CC is not allowed and everyone's bags and personal belongs are checked by security guide in advance.

If CC is allowed at public, let us say in schools, students may worry about whether the guy sit next to them carry a gun, instead of concentrating in a class. They may also loss the interests or scare to common on their classmates' work, since the trigger can be pulled out anytime without advance notices. Some students may become less sociable and are afraid of making friends, because they are not sure whether other students are sensitive to use guns. Not to mention, some unwanted shooting may occur because of lack of training of how to fire a handgun. Not anyone is a nature shooter and shooting a gun is not as easy as sharpening a pencil. It requires lots of training and practices. Therefore, I believe that CC can actually cause more problems than it has already had. It can not only push people to take action during an unpleasant argument, but also increase their self-control problems which may lead to unplanned shooting.

In conclusion, my position of whether people should have CC is negative. There are other alternatives rather than supporting CC to help promote public safety: offering free self-defense classes; handing out public safety awareness booklets; having advanced security camera installed and hiring more security guide in public area. The alternatives are not going to caused extra problems and can be beneficial for the community overall, while CC can cause public fear, increase the criminal rate and the frequency of unwanted injuries, as well as damage the trust between people and harm the society.

Writing Feedback / Do you think distance learning is more beneficial for students? [2]

Many universities have distance learning programs, which allow students to take classes at home via TV or the Internet rather than attend classes at some capital location. Do you think distance learning is more beneficial for students? Discuss providing examples.

With technology advanced, more and more colleges are offering distance learning programs, which can help students attain knowledge through online courses, and make education more accessible and flexible. Although, distance learning programs bring a new era of education, I maintain that it is not as beneficial as regular classroom courses.

Education is more than just teaching knowledge, it should also be viewed as a tool to help student develop an ability of socializing and cooperating with others. Studies show that students who take regular courses in classroom tend to be more sociable and outgoing than those who take online courses. In classroom, students can meet and discuss questions face to face with their classmates, which is beneficial for them, as it can improve their teamwork skills as well as communication skills. In addition, they will have many opportunities to get involved with campus activities, school organizations, and even future employers in a career fair. These are the features that distance learning programs are lack of.

Since distance learning programs allow students to take classes at home via Television or the Internet, they promotes a lack of enforcements on student who can't complete assignments on time, and produce a better chance for students who like to cheat for a better grade. Studying at home can become too comfortable to learn anything. Students may turn on Television and watch a football game instead of doing their homework; they can also pretend to study while surfing online and chatting with their friends through Facebook; at worse, they may bride someone to get their tests done, since professors are not present to watch them while they are taking the test. These disadvantages of distance learning programs really distort the purpose of education.

Students from distance learning programs sometime can get frustrated and depressed if they couldn't understand the course material. Although, they can always send an email to ask questions, it takes time to get a response from teachers. Not to mention, some problems are hard to understand through emails. If students were taking courses in a regular classroom, they could have the chance to ask questions during class and get a prompt answer in order to continue to learn. Face to face conversion is always beneficial for both parties if they need to solve the problems more efficiently. Therefore, I believe that distance learning programs cannot satisfy those students who are struggling with problems that need an immediate explanation.

Although, distance learning programs provide an alternative way to attain education for students who need flexibilities and conveniences, we have to recognize the disadvantages of it. Distance learning programs are not beneficial for everyone, and only one with greater socializing skills, higher self-discipline, and a better understanding of subjects can benefit from it.

Writing Feedback / The production and sale of cigarettes should be made illegal. [3]

With the increased health problems that caused by smoking, more and more people think that the production and sale of cigarettes should be made illegal. However, these people tend to ignore that the positive outcome of cigarettes business brings to the society. They also falsely believe that prohibition of producing and selling cigarettes will lead people to adopt a healthier living environment.

Cigarettes business is one of the most profitable industries in the world. The government receive huge amount of taxes from cigarettes companies and it actually uses the money to help fund the welfare program, in which a lot of people can benefit from. Making production and sale of cigarettes illegal will definitely hurt the income of the government, and add pressures on many people who are in need of welfare programs.

Some producers of cigarettes will probably keep the business running under the table, as they are still attracted by the humongous profit. This will create more problems that it actually has. It may cause chaos to the community, since smokers can go depressed and do harmful things without having cigarettes. It may also increase crime rate, since people have to trade cigarettes illegally; it can burden the government, since the government needs to spend more money on hiring people to stop the illegal sale and purchase of cigarettes. The potential negative effects on the illegalization of cigarettes are clearly telling us that it is not a desirable approach.

In addition, many smokers know that if they consume too many cigarettes, their life will be thread with various health problems; however, they still choose to smoke without worrying about their future health. If they have already cared less of their health, they could find way around to purchase cigarettes and smoke anyway even knowing that is illegal. Thus, it cannot provide people with a healthier living environment.

In conclusion, the government should not make the production and sale of cigarettes illegal because it will harm the society economically as well as create more problems that it actually has. The cost of illegalization of cigarettes outweighs the advantage of it, thus they should not make producing and selling cigarettes illegal.

Writing Feedback / College should not require Freshmen to purchase meal plans [3]

Most colleges required freshmen to purchase a meal plan and believe it will be beneficial for students because it can ensure students to spend money on food not on other things. However, I am inclined that students should be given the freedom and choices of what to want to eat and how they want to spend their money.

Many of my friends are freshmen and I couldn't hear them enough complaining about that colleges are offering very limited variety of food. There are few alternatives available for them to choose and they can easily get sick of eating on campus. Not to mention, most of food that colleges do provide are junk food with high fat and calorie. However, they still decide to eat on campus because of the meal plan. Thus, having meal plan definitely is attributable to students' unhealthy eating habit, which may cause they suffer health problems in the future.

College food is relatively expensive compare to the food off campus. I remember that I bought a box of ice cream for $5.99 from campus grocery store, however, it actually costs me only $2.99 in Wal-Mart. It really promotes a negative effect on students who don't know how to spend money irrationally. In addition, if students don't use out of the meal plan by the end of semester, the money left out on the plan go wasted. Therefore, meal plan couldn't really help student spend money wisely; rather provide a image of that wasting is appropriate.

Furthermore, freshmen can learn how to become responsible and manage to spend money if they are provided the chance. They would probably feel more appreciated for their parent's hard working when they see how money can be easily gone. They can also make budget for the weakly food expense, and if it goes beyond the budget, they can use the extra dollars to treat themselves while it is over budget, they can rearrange the budget plan and spend more cautiously with next purchase. With meal plan, there is no way that freshmen can learn and grow to a better person with accountabilities and smart budgeting skills.

In conclusion, I maintain that colleges should not require freshmen to use meal plan. Meal plan only can restrict students' ability to develop various skills. It also promotes a negative attribute of spending money. Therefore, colleges should encourage student to spend money in their own ways because it will help student build up their conception of how money can be spend in a more economical and reasonable way.