March 6, 2018
It's Just Pot
This week, I decided to binge Disjointed. Disjointed is a Netflix Original that follows the adventures that go on at a weed dispensary. Instead of just watching one or two episodes, I found myself binging the entire first season. Although, in theory, the show seems ridiculous and is extremely explicit, it does tackle topics like legalizing marijuana (I mean, how could it not) and also heavier topics such as post traumatic stress disorder. While watching the first season, I found myself agreeing with Ruth (the owner of the dispensary) and how she is huge advocate for legalizing weed.
Out of the 50 states, 29 of them have legalized marijuana for medical use. Marijuana should be legal in all 50 for recreational and medical use. Not only would this help each state out with taxes (assuming the drug would be taxed to the state), but that tax money can be used to help fund schools and fix roads and do other things that are normally harder to do because of tax cuts. For those worried about the states turning into one big hot box don’t have to worry because marijuana can be expensive so not everyone is going to buy it from the dispensaries and not everyone is going to want to smoke it in general.
On the medical side, marijuana has helped thousands of patients who suffer from various different illnesses. Legalizing the use of marijuana in all states also allows patients who require marijuana for treatment not to have to move to a different state. For instance, my aunt suffers from seizures and was told the oil from roots from a marijuana plant would help prevent seizures. In Missouri, she was only allowed to use the cannabidiol oil which is derived from hemp and not marijuana. Cannabidiol oil does help with mild seizures but lacks many qualities of oil from the actual marijuana plant, so my aunt packed up and moved to Washington so she could get the treatment she needed.
Overall, Marijuana should be legal in all 50 states because it will help with taxes and actually help the states become a better place to live in and can help keep patients closer to home. Just like what Ruth says in Disjointed, “It’s just pot”.
March 4, 2018
The Dangerous Black Market
In recent years mass shootings have sparked massive gun debates in the United States. Both sides of the debate have extremes, which leads to people arguing to a point where nothing is accomplished. One side of the extreme calls for the banning of all guns in the United States. The other extreme is saying that nothing should change other than more people being armed. These two extremes leads to nothing happening because the arguments go nowhere.
In the series Underground Inc., we get an inside look into the criminal world of all sorts of illegal dealings. In the first episode we get an inside look into the illegal world of guns. We see a small town in the Philippines where guns are illegally made in order to be distributed for crime. Gun trafficking happens all over the world and is one of the main ways that criminals are able to get their hands on weapons. Guns that are illegally made are especially dangerous because there are no ways to track these weapons, because there is no record of the gun. These guns from the Philippines, eventually make their way into the United States. The show then takes a look into what these weapons are used for. One of the guns is used to rob a drug dealer. Another couple of guns make their way into the hands of gang members. We do not see any shootings in the episode, but we see police go into the house of a suspect of a heavily armed illegal weapon owner. They are able to get a handful of illegal items off the streets. We also get a look into Guatemala another country infamous for its distribution of illegal arms into the United States. There are specialized forces who attempt to cut down on the illegal arms, however they can only do so much.
We also get a look into some states gun laws. Arizona is a state with pretty relaxed gun laws, however background checks and other regulations keep criminals from being able to legally purchase guns. We also get to see the prison sentences for various gun crimes, such as 10 years for scratching off serial numbers. After this segment a handful of illegal gun dealers talk about how in states with the strongest gun laws are where they make their most money. These strict laws created a market for them, and also created a more dangerous environment.
Mass shootings and gun crime would not be solved by banning all guns in the United States. If a person were to believe that this would be an adequate solution I would like for them to take a look at this show. The show does a good job of getting its point across, and it does it in a few different ways. They use a narrator to describe what is going on, they do live interviews with real criminals, and they do interviews with police and special forces. This is a great way to understand the dangerous markets that are created by outlawing items.
We certainly need to figure out a solution to get these guns out of criminals hands and make it harder for certain individuals to get their hands on them. However removing guns from the hands of good guys could make our country more dangerous than it already is.
In the series Underground Inc., we get an inside look into the criminal world of all sorts of illegal dealings. In the first episode we get an inside look into the illegal world of guns. We see a small town in the Philippines where guns are illegally made in order to be distributed for crime. Gun trafficking happens all over the world and is one of the main ways that criminals are able to get their hands on weapons. Guns that are illegally made are especially dangerous because there are no ways to track these weapons, because there is no record of the gun. These guns from the Philippines, eventually make their way into the United States. The show then takes a look into what these weapons are used for. One of the guns is used to rob a drug dealer. Another couple of guns make their way into the hands of gang members. We do not see any shootings in the episode, but we see police go into the house of a suspect of a heavily armed illegal weapon owner. They are able to get a handful of illegal items off the streets. We also get a look into Guatemala another country infamous for its distribution of illegal arms into the United States. There are specialized forces who attempt to cut down on the illegal arms, however they can only do so much.
We also get a look into some states gun laws. Arizona is a state with pretty relaxed gun laws, however background checks and other regulations keep criminals from being able to legally purchase guns. We also get to see the prison sentences for various gun crimes, such as 10 years for scratching off serial numbers. After this segment a handful of illegal gun dealers talk about how in states with the strongest gun laws are where they make their most money. These strict laws created a market for them, and also created a more dangerous environment.
Mass shootings and gun crime would not be solved by banning all guns in the United States. If a person were to believe that this would be an adequate solution I would like for them to take a look at this show. The show does a good job of getting its point across, and it does it in a few different ways. They use a narrator to describe what is going on, they do live interviews with real criminals, and they do interviews with police and special forces. This is a great way to understand the dangerous markets that are created by outlawing items.
We certainly need to figure out a solution to get these guns out of criminals hands and make it harder for certain individuals to get their hands on them. However removing guns from the hands of good guys could make our country more dangerous than it already is.
Trial by Coercisom
In the Netflix Original show, The Confession Tapes, viewers are exposed to six criminal cases in which people falsely confessed to murder. While the circumstances differ from case to case, the main reasons for why these false confessions happened remains rather constant. First, each defendant was subjected to numerous hours of interrogation without the presence of a lawyer. Second, the prosecutors and detectives involved in each case were overly confident about the suspects and they neglected other leads in this process. Also, the communities engaged in these cases had a very high regard for police authority, and during the trials, the juries were swayed by the elaborate narratives of the prosecutors. Many of the individuals impacted by these incidents were uneducated, vulnerable, or naive because they were able to be convinced that they committed a crime that the authorities had little evidence to support.
The most shocking episode in my opinion was the one called “Trial by Fire” because a mother was swayed to confess to the murder of her own daughter. The mother, Karen, left her house to go shopping with a friend and five minutes later, 911 received a call to report a fire at their home. The only person home was Karen’s daughter, Robin, who passed away from smoke inhalation in her bedroom. A gas can that had been missing from the family’s garage was found in her bedroom. Karen was questioned for many long hours without an attorney and ultimately confessed to starting the fire that killed her teenage daughter. This case was especially striking to me because the only evidence present was the gas can and the fact that Karen and Robin did not have a good relationship. It is also unknown whether the fire started in the hallway or in the bedroom because both attorneys had fire experts that told different stories.
For this case in particular, I had a hard time choosing which side to believe. With such little evidence, it is almost impossible to ever know the full story. I believe that Karen was wrongly accused of the murder of her daughter and that it instead was a suicide. While killing oneself by fire is not chosen often, the likelihood that is was a suicide is far greater than a homicide. The suicide rate in her daughter’s age group is very high. It also very well could have been accidental if Robin was playing with fire when she was home alone. Also, a third party fire expert concluded that the fire started in the room, not in the hallway. The gas tank used in the fire was left in the bedroom and if Karen wanted to cover up the fact that she lit the room on fire, she would have gotten rid of the gas tank most likely. In addition, Karen was interrogated just after the death of her daughter, which means she was in a very vulnerable place and was easily broken down.
The fact that the justice system in this country would allow so many false confessions like these to occur is simply heartbreaking and contradicts everything that our country was founded on. Law enforcement, prosecutors, and detectives must work together to ensure an honest and fair trial, no matter the circumstances.
The most shocking episode in my opinion was the one called “Trial by Fire” because a mother was swayed to confess to the murder of her own daughter. The mother, Karen, left her house to go shopping with a friend and five minutes later, 911 received a call to report a fire at their home. The only person home was Karen’s daughter, Robin, who passed away from smoke inhalation in her bedroom. A gas can that had been missing from the family’s garage was found in her bedroom. Karen was questioned for many long hours without an attorney and ultimately confessed to starting the fire that killed her teenage daughter. This case was especially striking to me because the only evidence present was the gas can and the fact that Karen and Robin did not have a good relationship. It is also unknown whether the fire started in the hallway or in the bedroom because both attorneys had fire experts that told different stories.
For this case in particular, I had a hard time choosing which side to believe. With such little evidence, it is almost impossible to ever know the full story. I believe that Karen was wrongly accused of the murder of her daughter and that it instead was a suicide. While killing oneself by fire is not chosen often, the likelihood that is was a suicide is far greater than a homicide. The suicide rate in her daughter’s age group is very high. It also very well could have been accidental if Robin was playing with fire when she was home alone. Also, a third party fire expert concluded that the fire started in the room, not in the hallway. The gas tank used in the fire was left in the bedroom and if Karen wanted to cover up the fact that she lit the room on fire, she would have gotten rid of the gas tank most likely. In addition, Karen was interrogated just after the death of her daughter, which means she was in a very vulnerable place and was easily broken down.
The fact that the justice system in this country would allow so many false confessions like these to occur is simply heartbreaking and contradicts everything that our country was founded on. Law enforcement, prosecutors, and detectives must work together to ensure an honest and fair trial, no matter the circumstances.
Wrongfully Convicted?
In The Confession Tapes, two teenage boys are charged with the murder of one of their families. This took place in Washington state and the boys’ names were Sebastian Burns and Atif Rafay. Atif’s family were the ones murdered. The boys had alibis and none of the forensic evidence the police had pointed to Atif or Sebastian, but they have both been convicted and have served twenty plus years already. What the police do have, though, is a confession on tape. The confession took place in Canada with some undercover Canadian cops trying to tell the boys that the police had evidence that pointed to them as the killers, which was a lie, there was no evidence that said the boys were the murderers. After Mr. Big, which is what the undercover operation is called, gained the boys’ trust, they asked the boys to tell them exactly what happened that night so they, the undercover cops, would be able to take care of all the evidence and it would lead to the boys not being arrested for the murders of Atif’s family. The undercover cops recorded all of their conversations with the boys, and got their confession on tape.
I like how the show shows not only the boys’ point of view and opinions with Sebastian’s father but also the police’s point of view of the case also, with a Bellvue detective. They also bring in many other people to show their opinions on the case, with some saying the boys absolutely did not murder Atif’s family, and also some that to this day that think they did, like one of the jurors from the trial. The show definitely lets you believe who you want to and therefore form your own opinion on the case.
The opinion I was able to form from the first two episodes, which covered the murder of Atif’s family, was that I do not think the Canadian police tactic called Mr. Big, which is illegal in the United States, should stand in the US courts as evidence. The boys were manipulated into their confession, which I believe could be a false confession. Imagine this: you and your best friend are the only suspects in a murder. You begin to overthink aspects of the murder and go through everything to be sure there is nothing there that could point to you and your best friend as the murderers. Then come along a group of guys claiming they want to help you and make sure you are not charged with the murder. They tell you the police have evidence against you that could put you two in jail the next day. Now even though you have solid alibis and didn’t murder anyone, you don’t want to be wrongfully convicted, what would you do? It’s really hard to say what anyone would do under that pressure. Keep in mind that these teenage boys, only 19 at the time, were going in front of Canada’s best manipulators while being unaware of it.
From what I was able to see of the confession of the two boys in the murder of Atif’s family, the boy’s stories didn’t always match up when separated and questioned alone. Many aspects were different, like where they put their bloody clothes and the baseball bat that was used to kill Atif’s family. Sebastian said he murdered the family by himself and naked, so there were no clothes to dispose of, then the two were together and they said they tossed the clothes in dumpsters, and then Atif said it was “out the window.” Little aspects of the murder that night were not solid on what happened.
There was evidence that pointed away from the boys, but evidently didn’t stand up in court. There were three “endorsed leads from other police organizations” that were mentioned in one interview with Sebastian’s former girlfriend. One was an FBI informant who had very specific details of what he knew, including that the family was murdered with a baseball bat, which the police did not know at the time this informant came forward.
The Mr. Big technique has come under a lot of scrutinies since this case in Canada. Some say it is unethical, which I would agree with. The boys who were convicted of Atif’s family’s murder were both charged with three consecutive terms, neither with the possibility of parole. They have come to the end of their ropes, Sebastian has used up all of his appeals and Atif has one remaining.
I like how the show shows not only the boys’ point of view and opinions with Sebastian’s father but also the police’s point of view of the case also, with a Bellvue detective. They also bring in many other people to show their opinions on the case, with some saying the boys absolutely did not murder Atif’s family, and also some that to this day that think they did, like one of the jurors from the trial. The show definitely lets you believe who you want to and therefore form your own opinion on the case.
The opinion I was able to form from the first two episodes, which covered the murder of Atif’s family, was that I do not think the Canadian police tactic called Mr. Big, which is illegal in the United States, should stand in the US courts as evidence. The boys were manipulated into their confession, which I believe could be a false confession. Imagine this: you and your best friend are the only suspects in a murder. You begin to overthink aspects of the murder and go through everything to be sure there is nothing there that could point to you and your best friend as the murderers. Then come along a group of guys claiming they want to help you and make sure you are not charged with the murder. They tell you the police have evidence against you that could put you two in jail the next day. Now even though you have solid alibis and didn’t murder anyone, you don’t want to be wrongfully convicted, what would you do? It’s really hard to say what anyone would do under that pressure. Keep in mind that these teenage boys, only 19 at the time, were going in front of Canada’s best manipulators while being unaware of it.
From what I was able to see of the confession of the two boys in the murder of Atif’s family, the boy’s stories didn’t always match up when separated and questioned alone. Many aspects were different, like where they put their bloody clothes and the baseball bat that was used to kill Atif’s family. Sebastian said he murdered the family by himself and naked, so there were no clothes to dispose of, then the two were together and they said they tossed the clothes in dumpsters, and then Atif said it was “out the window.” Little aspects of the murder that night were not solid on what happened.
There was evidence that pointed away from the boys, but evidently didn’t stand up in court. There were three “endorsed leads from other police organizations” that were mentioned in one interview with Sebastian’s former girlfriend. One was an FBI informant who had very specific details of what he knew, including that the family was murdered with a baseball bat, which the police did not know at the time this informant came forward.
The Mr. Big technique has come under a lot of scrutinies since this case in Canada. Some say it is unethical, which I would agree with. The boys who were convicted of Atif’s family’s murder were both charged with three consecutive terms, neither with the possibility of parole. They have come to the end of their ropes, Sebastian has used up all of his appeals and Atif has one remaining.
Mystery Science Theater 3000 and You
Mystery Science Theater 3000 is a cult classic TV show about a guy stuck in space with only robots and bad movies for company. Now the word “cult classic” implies that while there is an extremely dedicated fan base, there is a strong dislike of the show among other communities. However, I think that Mystery Science Theater 3000 is a very clever show, and while I can’t judge anyone’s sense of humor, I think that Mystery Science Theater 3000 makes a variety of references that almost any one can at least partially understand.
Not every show makes references to Don Quixote, but within the first few minutes of episode 1108 The Many Loves of Hercules we hear one of the robots named Tom Servo say that the director is “the man of La Manca” as a reference to the musical about Don Quixote because of the director's last name of Manca. In the same episode, they mention a Marx brother, alien movies, and the designer of Central Park. This wide variety of jokes is an attempt appeal to a wide audience. Now while some may find the nerdier jokes off-putting and may think that they aren’t smart enough to enjoy the show, I ask them to give the show a try. While you might not get every joke, you will really appreciate the ones you do understand. It is also possible that you might so intrigued by a reference that you will look it up and become a more knowledgeable person.
Another aspect some people find difficult to enjoy is how terrible the movies are. I know personally that some movies are a slog to watch because they can be slow as molasses. However, it think this is mostly a hold over conception from the old series. I enjoy most of the movies from the revival more than the old ones. When I told my little brother about the movies that we’re riffed upon for the revival, he said he had watched one of them for fun already. In fact, there is an art to choosing a movie for Mystery Science Theater 3000. While you don’t want a terrible film that is neigh unbearable to watch, you also want to provide enough bad elements for the host and the bots to riff on. It think that the vast majority of the revival films walk this line very well. If a viewer was discouraged by the dullness of the films they viewed in the old series, I suggest the new series.
One aspect that has not changed is the humor. The bots and the host still mock movies and have separate parts of the show where they lambast different parts of the film on their own. Some people don’t like the making fun of the films, seeing as someone put some sort of an effort into the films. In fact, this mockery can some times be the best thing for these film. I sincerely doubt that Manos: The Hands of Fate would be any more than a film canister gathering dust in a vault we’re it not for the Mystery Science Theater 3000 crew. The cast of that film seems none to bothered with the mockery. While I can’t speak for all the actors and other artists involved in these projects, I don’t think many of them are to hurt with the mockery.
A last group of people may not connect with the idea of a guy in space. Mystery Science Theater 3000 isn’t just about a guy in space though. It is about forming and unusual family forming because of their isolation. While the bots may act like disrespectful toward Jonah, you can see that they do care for him, especially at the season finale (which I will not spoil.) This shows what the mad scientist sending up the movies should be studying, how do families form in bizarre circumstances. I think that Mystery Science Theater 3000 is a show that almost anyone can gain something from, but don’t just take my word for it. Maybe watch an episode in the not to distant future.
Not every show makes references to Don Quixote, but within the first few minutes of episode 1108 The Many Loves of Hercules we hear one of the robots named Tom Servo say that the director is “the man of La Manca” as a reference to the musical about Don Quixote because of the director's last name of Manca. In the same episode, they mention a Marx brother, alien movies, and the designer of Central Park. This wide variety of jokes is an attempt appeal to a wide audience. Now while some may find the nerdier jokes off-putting and may think that they aren’t smart enough to enjoy the show, I ask them to give the show a try. While you might not get every joke, you will really appreciate the ones you do understand. It is also possible that you might so intrigued by a reference that you will look it up and become a more knowledgeable person.
Another aspect some people find difficult to enjoy is how terrible the movies are. I know personally that some movies are a slog to watch because they can be slow as molasses. However, it think this is mostly a hold over conception from the old series. I enjoy most of the movies from the revival more than the old ones. When I told my little brother about the movies that we’re riffed upon for the revival, he said he had watched one of them for fun already. In fact, there is an art to choosing a movie for Mystery Science Theater 3000. While you don’t want a terrible film that is neigh unbearable to watch, you also want to provide enough bad elements for the host and the bots to riff on. It think that the vast majority of the revival films walk this line very well. If a viewer was discouraged by the dullness of the films they viewed in the old series, I suggest the new series.
One aspect that has not changed is the humor. The bots and the host still mock movies and have separate parts of the show where they lambast different parts of the film on their own. Some people don’t like the making fun of the films, seeing as someone put some sort of an effort into the films. In fact, this mockery can some times be the best thing for these film. I sincerely doubt that Manos: The Hands of Fate would be any more than a film canister gathering dust in a vault we’re it not for the Mystery Science Theater 3000 crew. The cast of that film seems none to bothered with the mockery. While I can’t speak for all the actors and other artists involved in these projects, I don’t think many of them are to hurt with the mockery.
A last group of people may not connect with the idea of a guy in space. Mystery Science Theater 3000 isn’t just about a guy in space though. It is about forming and unusual family forming because of their isolation. While the bots may act like disrespectful toward Jonah, you can see that they do care for him, especially at the season finale (which I will not spoil.) This shows what the mad scientist sending up the movies should be studying, how do families form in bizarre circumstances. I think that Mystery Science Theater 3000 is a show that almost anyone can gain something from, but don’t just take my word for it. Maybe watch an episode in the not to distant future.
Bright: The Modern Fantasy
With Will Smith taking one of the lead roles, Netflix’s first big-budget movie Bright is a fantastic story, bringing the fantasy world to the modern era. Bright incorporates many elements that give a fresh idea to the fantasy world, such as how mythical races such as orcs and elves use modern technology and fit into modern societal roles. Orcs in fantasy were always the brutes, no one really enjoyed their presence, but they were there. This fits them into the category of being the main residents of hoods and gangs. Elves are typically a more advanced and prosperous race, which fits into the rich-snob category of society. The elves in Bright seem to pull the strings throughout the movie, being the antagonist of the story as well as the main race who are the federal agents. They are also the main wielders of magic in the story, which is the main plot device. Humans are just kind of there, not fitting into a particular mold, which is normal for a fantasy story.
Many critics, however, did not like the movie, calling the plot too simple and the characters too shallow. I disagree with that though. I believe that the meat of the enjoyment of this movie is in the character arcs and the world building. It was really fun to see how all these different races fit into the world that, for all intents and purposes, we live in. Going into a club with orcs playing death metal, and Jackoby calling it “the best love song he’s ever heard”(Bright). Or when Ward kills the fairy at the beginning of the movie just like a fly. The character arcs of the two main characters are also incredible. Jackoby, who really is the more important and interesting of the two main characters, goes from being hated by pretty much everyone to the chosen one and finally being accepted by his orc brethren. Ward, while not as pronounced, still went from a hardass cop who hated his partner to finally accepting who he is and supporting him in that.
Bright is a fun watch, and while it may not be the most original or in depth story, the characters and the fantastical world that they live in keep the movie going. Nothing like watching an elf running into a convenience store with a car and the good guys using a magic wand to blow up the gas tank.
Ayer, David, director. Bright. Bright, Netflix.
Make Happy
Netflix has a collection of their own comedy shows that they sponsor and put on Netflix. One of these comedy shows was done by Bo Burnham in his Netflix comedy special Make Happy. He is a 28 year old comedian from Massachusetts. He uses some very dark and perverted comedy to relate to his audience. One thing that he does differently than other is he also uses his musical background in the course of his comedy shows. One of the best things about him is how well he reacts to things going on in the audience. We can tell from the sound effects that most of his production is staged and prepared before, but when thing happen in the audience, he is able to adapt and come up with something to say very quickly. Also the kind of dark and cynical humor he has is the kind that many of the young generation like and even adore. Bo is one of the youngest professional comedians so he is able to relate to a younger audience more so. However, he does have a personality that makes it enjoyable for older generations too. Bo follows an outline and keeps his show on track which is a very important thing. Sometimes comedians get too caught up in a joke, and then make that joke into a tangent that makes them stray. Bo has very few of these moments, which provides for a better flow in the show. An interesting fact about Bo is that he does not only do comedy but he acted in a show for MTV and also wrote his own book of poetry. This combined with his musical talent and comedy skills provide for a well rounded comedian. I think Bo Burnham is one of the best overall comedians ever. He has a great style and personality that make him the best comedian. Bo also did not intend to become famous. He was putting some of his music videos on YouTube for his family to see and ended up becoming a sensation in just one night. Although he is a very good comedian, he also faces a lot of controversy with the groups of people that he makes fun of in his jokes. He has had multiple instances of minority groups that become mad at him due to his “insensitive jokes”. I do not think his jokes are insensitive because he does not focus on just one demographic, he makes jokes about everyone in all walks of life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)