Sounding like the grumpy old man I have become, I often shake my head and complain about the lack of basic knowledge among young people today when it comes to government, history, geography, literature, and civics. Ask a college-aged student about the branches of government and Constitutional provisions, and one gets blank stares or impassioned (though incorrect)pronouncements more often than accurate answers. I know I have not been alone in throwing my hands up and asking, “what are they teaching these kids?!” (And I’m a teacher!)
Well this week I found at least one of the answers – and it lies in the textbooks and textbook companies being chosen.
Pearson PLC is one of the largest textbook manufacturers in the United States, with sales in 70 countries. Like most large text publishers, they seek multi-million dollar monopoly contracts to supply books for all public schools throughout a state via state education departments. But they have also wrapped their tentacles around more than just printing books, as they have now become the predominant publisher of testing systems as well (in spite of a 2012 discovery in New York State that at least 30 of their answers on such student tests were incorrect.)
Last year, I was hired by Pearson on a temporary contract to grade qualifying exams submitted by new teachers. These were individuals who were seeking to become certified public school teachers, and they took essay tests relating to their chosen subject area. As a college business teacher, I was selected to help grade aspiring high school business teacher exams.
We were told to grade essays on a 1-4 scale. If a candidate at least "grasped some of the issues", we were instructed to grade that essay a 3 out of 4 - a passing grade. It was a group effort, whereby scores were agreed upon by consensus, and I was constantly critiqued for scoring essays too low. I was also overruled.
The most frustrating part is that we were told specifically that we could not reduce our scoring for spelling, grammar, or organization.
Yes, that’s right. America’s next generation of teachers: spelling, grammar, and organization are unimportant for the purposes of obtaining teacher certification. Perhaps that's part of the problem...
But now I've run across this textbook gem, currently making the rounds on Facebook… I'd like to say it's a hoax, but, I am sad to say, it’s been verified.
The American Nation, a Pearson textbook (ISBN 0131817159), is a mandated textbook used throughout New York State. On page 237, the text discusses the Constitutional Rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Rather than allowing the Constitution’s words to speak for themselves, and rather than drawing on legal principles, the text explains the Second Amendment this way:
“Each state has the right to maintain a militia, an armed force for its own protection. Today, the militia is the National Guard. The national government and the states can and do regulate the private ownership and use of firearms.”
That’s not fact: that's pure political sentiment. As a matter of Constitutional Law, it is a complete failure.
In striking down the Firearms Control Regulations Act as unconstitutional, the U.S. Court of Appeals held as follows:
“[The Second Amendment] protects an individual right to keep and bear arms…the [right] was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)."
They also noted that though the right to bear arms also helped preserve the citizen militia, "the activities [the Amendment] protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia." The court determined that handguns are "Arms" and concluded that thus they may not be banned by the District of Columbia.
On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)), the Court affirmed the decision, holding that text and history of the Second Amendment demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms, not a right restricted to national guards or formal militias.
Pearson’s textbook is absolutely, legally, and ethically, incorrect. And if you wonder why today’s young people don’t understand their government, country, or history, here is a prime example why.
.
Showing posts with label second amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label second amendment. Show all posts
Friday, March 21, 2014
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Thoughts on "Security"
In the wake of the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the federal government began a series of ever-increasing security changes in the screening of airline passengers to prevent future terrorist attacks. These changes all view passengers (more than 99.9% of whom are law-abiding airline customers) as potential 'problems;' thus, in an effort to increase 'safety,' passengers are searched and substances ranging from nail files to shampoo bottles are prohibited.
Of course, none of that prevented Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber," from attempting to blow up American Airlines Flight 63 on Dec 22, 2001 using plastic explosives hidden in a hollowed out shoe.
True to form, the government's response was to require passengers to remove their shoes and put them through the x-ray machines. Subsequent changes prohibited liquids on board.
And so, on Christmas Day 2010, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarded Northwest Flight 253with powdered explosives in his underwear. No liquids, no hollow shoes.
The response? The feds now believe that full-body x-rays machines, that will enable them to look into underwear, will fix this 'loophole.' Of course, the machine is unable to look through skin into body cavities....anyone want to guess how the next terrorist will hide their explosives? (Remember, these are *suicide* bombers).
It is instructive to note the similarities between the incidents surrounding Richard "Shoebomber" Reid, Umar "Christmas Bomber" Abdulmutallab, and even United Airlines Flight 93 on the day of the 9/11 attacks:
Government Security measures were unable to prevent the attacks. 100% safety will never be possible - not in the real world. Each time a new security measure is used, would-be terrorists will simply use a different ploy. Obama's 'tightening' of security on flights originating in a list of 14 nations is doomed to failure, as terrorists simply set up bases, obtain passports, and choose to depart from nations not on that list.
But there is a more important similarity between these events:
Flight 93 missed its Washington target because passengers took action and subdued the terrorists.
Richard Reid's plot failed because passengers subdued him and bound him with seatbelt extensions and headphone cords, and a doctor on the flight plied him with valium.
Umar Abdulmutallab failed because a passenger subdued him.
And in the midst of this, while pilots are asking to be armed, the Obama administration is defunding and downplaying the need and right of airline personnel and passengers to defend themselves. Passengers, Pilots, and Airline staff are not the problem: they are the solution.
In a related hair-brained, half-thought-through action, The Joint Facilities committee of the New Hampshire House just passed by an 8-3 vote (party lines) the following regulation:
"No person, except for law enforcement personnel in active duty, shall carry a firearm or other dangerous or deadly weapon or an explosive, openly or concealed, while inside the State House, the Legislative Office Building, the Upham Walker House, or any of the underground tunnels connected to these buildings. Law enforcement personnel, when requested by State House security staff, must produce sufficient identification establishing their status as law enforcement personnel."
In other words, every would-be terrorist or nut job is now on notice that the 400+ legislators at the State House, as well the staff, is now defenseless. Once again, this turns reality on its head: an armed citizenry is the answer, not the problem! It is a rule that the full legislature should overturn immediately.
Labels:
al qaeda,
Richard Reid,
second amendment,
Security,
terrorism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)