In Iowa, you have to be 21 to carry a handgun and 18 to carry a rifle or shotgun. You are not required to register or have a license, but a permit is necessary to carry a handgun. You will also need a permit to purchase a handgun, but not a shotgun or rifle. Possession of a firearm by a convicted felon is prohibited, along with improper storage while handling.
Iowa's gun policy is pretty relaxed compared to most other states. The D.C. v. Heller case ruled that people should have the right to have a firearm in their home. People like to have a gun for security and self-defense. I don't think this case has made much impact on Iowa gun laws. The court ruled in favor of individual rights and Iowa's gun laws reflect that decision.
Feb 24, 2011
Feb 17, 2011
Abortion
I strongly feel that abortion should not be legal. Most women are for abortion because they feel that they should have the right to control their own body. But in the case of abortion, their body is not the one being controlled-- the baby's is. Most people would argue that the fetus is not a human being, just a blob of tissue. But life begins at conception. If not at conception, then when does it technically become a child? Sex is for the purpose of creating a child. If you are mature enough to have sex, then you should be mature enough to accept the consequences-- pregnancy.
The 14th Amendment states, "Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This means that women have the right to abort their baby, right? Technically yes, but what about the rights of the baby? An unborn baby is a person just like you.
The 14th Amendment states, "Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This means that women have the right to abort their baby, right? Technically yes, but what about the rights of the baby? An unborn baby is a person just like you.
Feb 8, 2011
Miranda Rights for Students
Miranda rights apply to everyone, including juveniles, or in this case, a student. Occasionally, students will break the law while in school. They may have drug paraphernalia or have done something illegal. It's usually a serious matter that requires the involvement of the police.
When questioning a student, police officers are required to follow the Miranda principles. School officials are not required to do so when there is possible criminal involvement. For Miranda purposes, a juvenile interrogated in school will most likely be considered to be in custody. A juvenile may also waive their Miranda rights, just as anyone else can. Depending on the age of the student in question, the police officer may have to explain their rights, instead of just reading them, to ensure that they fully understand.
http://www.familyrightsassociation.com/info/law/all_about_miranda/Questioning%20of%20Juveniles.htm
When questioning a student, police officers are required to follow the Miranda principles. School officials are not required to do so when there is possible criminal involvement. For Miranda purposes, a juvenile interrogated in school will most likely be considered to be in custody. A juvenile may also waive their Miranda rights, just as anyone else can. Depending on the age of the student in question, the police officer may have to explain their rights, instead of just reading them, to ensure that they fully understand.
http://www.familyrightsassociation.com/info/law/all_about_miranda/Questioning%20of%20Juveniles.htm
Feb 4, 2011
Texas v. Johnson
I agree with the court rulings from the case of Texas v. Johnson. He was found guilty of "desecrating the flag in violation of Texas law." I believe that he had no right to burn the flag. He was doing it in protest and the people were chanting: "America the red, white, and blue we spit on you." Burning a flag is the method of disposing of it.
The Court of Criminal Appeals argued that Johnson's actions were protected by his First Amendment Rights. They admitted that it was offensive, but argued that it was not a breach of the peace. He was convicted for burning the flag, but not the words that he spoke.
The government doesn't think that America's sign of freedom should be burned.
The Court of Criminal Appeals argued that Johnson's actions were protected by his First Amendment Rights. They admitted that it was offensive, but argued that it was not a breach of the peace. He was convicted for burning the flag, but not the words that he spoke.
The government doesn't think that America's sign of freedom should be burned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)