The following letters were written in a Brainerd High School American Government class.
That $10 fee
Starting last semester Brainerd High School started charging students to park in their lots. The fee is $10 per semester. The school board claims that we have to pay to have security guards in the lots to protect our vehicles. Well, it's quite ironic, but in the last few weeks, there have been numerous vehicles broken into in the lower lot with items stolen out of them.
I don't have a problem with paying to park if the cars are actually going to be protected, but obviously we're paying for nothing. If we're going to have security in the lots they should be doing their job. The security guards should go considering they're not doing their job anyway, along with the parking fee. We're just wasting our money on security we're not getting.
I believe that the Brainerd High School parking lot discrimination is wrong. The school requires the students to pay a $10 fee to park in the school lots. This is all fine and good. But everywhere else that I know of guarantees spots for paying students. But we are not guaranteed anything. And on top of that, only seniors and teachers are allowed in the upper lots. I thought discrimination was illegal, but I guess that doesn't apply to schools.
One solution to this problem is to first stop the discrimination. The school could let all students park as they come (first come, first served). They could have one universal parking sticker for all students.
Another solution would be to mark all spots in all the parking spots and give numbers to those who pay their fee. That would keep everything fair.
A third solution would be to remove the parking fees and the rent-a-cop. Then nobody would feel like they were being used for their money. In addition they could also stop the discrimination and allow parking freely.
Bad grad standards
The Minnesota State Legislature has given the class of 2002 and future classes some bad grad standards.
These grad standards are confusing, complicated, and difficult to carry out. I am a junior right now and the standards I have completed so far have made me confused and I wasn't quite sure about what I was supposed to do. Some of my teachers were not even sure if they were carrying them out correctly.
These grad standards were designed to make students more challenged, they are definitely more challenging but they also accomplish the task of making some students kind of angry. From what I have seen and heard recently it isn't the best to have angry students running around.
All I'm saying is that the state Legislature should look at these grad standards and maybe restructure them a bit.
I would just like to write my opinion on the treadmill approved by the city council for the Brainerd Police Department reported in the paper on Tuesday, April 3. I feel that this absolutely pointless and a huge waste of taxpayers' money. A $4,299 (plus tax and set up costs) expense for workout equipment for the police department is appalling. Did the city council members even consider that we have a number of workout facilities throughout the city? If we are going to provide a treadmills for the police department, maybe we should provide workers throughout the city with treadmills. Is the city willing to pay for a $4,299 piece of equipment for every business located in Brainerd? I guarantee not! The city never should have approved this request.
Now my solution to this unnecessary waste of taxpayers' dollars is to simply have the police department personnel run outside where they can get some fresh air. They get breaks don't they? They can use the treadmills at the YMCA or have equipment put in their homes. If this expenditure is just for the physical fitness of the police department personnel, they should have taken a "treadmill pool" and raised the money on their own.
PETA Web site
I was recently browsing on the Internet when I found a Web site made by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). I was curious to see what I would find, and I was shocked by the so-called facts that they put on their Web site in order to brainwash people into believing that they should dump dairy.
In the "Got Beer?" Campaign, milk drinkers were told that they would have serious side effects such as obesity, gas, pimples, heart disease, and cancer. After I read all of these horrible things that happen when a person drinks milk, I wondered, what are the side effects of drinking beer? Hmmmm. Obesity, gas, liver cancer, and many, many others. I also have heard of many people who have received a ticket for Driving While Intoxicated. Of all the people I know, none of them received punishment for exceeding the level on drinking milk. This is probably because it is a cheaper and safer product. There are so many benefits of drinking milk. Some of them include strong bones and teeth. There are numerous studies that confirm you should include milk in a healthy diet.
PETA, out of respect for the Mother's Against Drunk Driving, stopped their campaign titled "Got Beer?" They said they would be back with a new beer campaign. Many PETA supporters are well intentioned, but in my opinion they are way off-base with this campaign.
Eminem and the media
I am writing a letter about the effect media has on today's youth. The other day I was watching a talk show, and on this show they were discussing this very issue. They had the mother of rapper Eminem on the show. And they also had an outraged mother whose child was a fan of rap music, particularly Eminem, and she didn't approve of his taste. A lot of the people on the show were attacking Eminem's mother and how she shouldn't accept or allow her son to do what he does. To me it seemed as if they were blaming her, Eminem and rap music for all the violence that goes on with today's youth. In some of his songs Eminem makes some discriminatory remarks against gays. And although I don't agree with him doing this, I still don't think it's the cause for all the teasing that goes on between children, which is what they were implying on the show. Personally I think that teasing was around long before Eminem was. And to blame it on rap is irresponsible and immature on the parents' part. I am not saying that I think children should be exposed to swearing and sexual remarks, but I do believe that trying to rid the world of these things is an impossible task. And that instead of focusing all their energy and attention at blaming others for their children's problems they should be focusing their attention toward their children. And then maybe instead of turning toward music or television for answers the children would be turning to their parents. So in conclusion, I think that maybe instead of blaming the music and television industries for the problems in today's youth maybe parents should be looking at what influence they have on their children's behavior and evaluate that first.
Profiles of Learning
What is the reason for having the Profiles of Learning?
The Profiles of Learning, for one thing, make unnecessary paperwork for teachers. When the "Profiles" were created, parts of the old curriculum were incorporated. Now, however, teachers must complete time-consuming paperwork that they previously got along fine without.
The Profiles are also unfair. A student can have straight As and still fail a class if they miss one graduation standard. If that class is required for graduation it is possible they may not graduate on time. While at the same time, a D student can pass the class as long as they complete the graduation standard for that class. Put simply, an A student who misses on assignment fails while another student can miss many assignments throughout the course and still get a credit.
There certainly weren't any brains behind the Profiles of Learning. As far as I'm concerned, it's an unfair waste of time that was created by state lawmakers to boost their rating with voters.
After all, if the "Profiles" are such a great program then why haven't anyone of the other 49 states adopted the legislation and why is it nearly impossible to find a single teacher who supports the Profiles of Learning?
Focus on safety
Every night when I watch the news you hear something about how bad guns are. Or else it seems like every week there is another school shooting. But what it really bugs me is that because of all these people that abuse the use of guns they want to take everybody's guns away. The guns aren't the ones that pull their own trigger, it's the selfish people who don't care about their country that do. So why are innocent people that use guns for recreation or even their own safety being penalized?
My family has hunted for years. Many think it's cruel but it's a way of keeping the populations down and it is also a source of food for many. Yes there are the few people who abuse this recreational activity, and for all those people out there that are using guns in the wrong way all I have to say is thanks a lot!
A point that I would like to make is in the Constitution the first 10 amendments are the Bill of Rights, also called our civil rights. The Second Amendment is the one that gives us the right to bear arms. This is a right that we have from the Constitution. I do agree that when the Constitution was written things were different, there weren't kids going and shooting other kids.
I wish people who didn't know about guns wouldn't protest them because if they are used safely and responsibly people won't get hurt. So before people out there start voting to get rid of guns think about it and instead of taking guns away maybe we should focus more on gun safety and helping people who might use guns in the wrong way.
Brainerd Dispatch ©2013. All Rights Reserved.