News For the Week of Spring Break:

http://www.cnn.com/specials/us/crime-and-justice

Boston marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was recently found guilty of 30 counts after 11 and a half hours of deliberation in the Boston Bombing trial. 17 of these 30 counts were capital charges, meaning that Tsarnev is eligible to be sentenced to death. The next phase of the trial is a penalty phase, in which 12 jurors will decide whether or not Tsarnaev, 21, will face the death penalty, or a life in prison. They will hear testimony again from both sides, the defense offering that at the time of the bombing Tsarnaev was only 19, and was being compelled by his ringleader older brother, 26,  who died in a police shootout days after the attack. The date of this trial has not yet been set.   

In this video many of the jurors stated that they once had believed the death penalty was inhumane and not a justifiable punishment. Many said that 20 years ago they would never rule to execute, but after having children, seeing the evidence, and hearing the testimony from the victims and their families, are now giving considerable thought, and are open to the idea of execution. I think that the defense brings up a valid point of the age of the accused, and also the fact that as a younger brother he would be pliable to the demands of his older brother. But I do not know if the defense is using that approach because its the last ditch effort to save his life, or if it is the truth and that he didn’t have the power to overrule his brother. My assumption after hearing the report is that the jury will push the death penalty. I think that if I was put in the position of deciding the fate of this man’s life the overwhelming evidence and the lives lost would have me vote in favor of the death penalty.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/12/europe/pope-francis-turkey-armenia-genocide-reference/index.html

Pope Francis riled the people of Turkey by referring to the mass killings of the Armenians over a century ago by the Ottoman Empire as a genocide. The pope references a 2001 declaration by Pope John Paul II and the head of the Armenian Church saying “The first which is widely considered the first genocide of the 20th century.” This caused the Turks to recall their ambassador to the vatican for “consultations”. The Turkish Foreign minister reached out to the Twitter community tweeting that the use of the word ‘genocide’ was “unacceptable” and “out of touch with historical facts and legal basis”. Turkey does not want to cut ties with the vatican. But believes that the killing of the armenians was just the result of intercommunal violence during World War 1.

I thought this article was interesting because of the relation to the genocide projects we just finished. The Armenian Genocide was a systematic killing of over 1.5 million people. From what we just have studied it falls well under the title of genocide, and therefore it is not unacceptable for the Pope to refer to it as one. We are taught of this event as the Armenian “Genocide” not the Armenian “intercommunal violence resulting in mass deaths”. This shows the unwillingness of the Turkish government to come to terms with tragedy of a century and take blame. The Turkish foreign minister seemed to take personal offense to the pope’s comment as if he was attacking the current state of Turkey. I think that the Pope’s comment is reasonable and did not deserve the uproar.

http://www.cnn.com/specials/latest-news-videos

In the light of the recent plane crash in the French Alps, the question of humanless piloting of planes has gained some more consideration. Statistics show that 80% of commercial crashes are the result of human error. The technology to fly planes from the ground or have the machine fully fly itself is available and used mainly for military drones. It brings up the question of are we safer without pilots? The FAA has not approved pilotless flight and has not been asked to do so yet.

Automation can fail, should we untrust solely technology with our lives? I don’t think so, or at least not yet. Humans error is indisputable, but the intentional attempts to crash planes are very few. I think that yes, we should continue researching and advancing whatever aerial technology we have and making flight as safe as it can be. I still however think that humans are needed as a safety net in case any technical problems occur on board, and that the FAA should not be in any rush to approve piloted flight.

News For the Week of Spring Break:

http://www.cnn.com/specials/us/crime-and-justice

Boston marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was recently found guilty of 30 counts after 11 and a half hours of deliberation in the Boston Bombing trial. 17 of these 30 counts were capital charges, meaning that Tsarnev is eligible to be sentenced to death. The next phase of the trial is a penalty phase, in which 12 jurors will decide whether or not Tsarnaev, 21, will face the death penalty, or a life in prison. They will hear testimony again from both sides, the defense offering that at the time of the bombing Tsarnaev was only 19, and was being compelled by his ringleader older brother, 26,  who died in a police shootout days after the attack. The date of this trial has not yet been set.   

In this video many of the jurors stated that they once had believed the death penalty was inhumane and not a justifiable punishment. Many said that 20 years ago they would never rule to execute, but after having children, seeing the evidence, and hearing the testimony from the victims and their families, are now giving considerable thought, and are open to the idea of execution. I think that the defense brings up a valid point of the age of the accused, and also the fact that as a younger brother he would be pliable to the demands of his older brother. But I do not know if the defense is using that approach because its the last ditch effort to save his life, or if it is the truth and that he didn’t have the power to overrule his brother. My assumption after hearing the report is that the jury will push the death penalty. I think that if I was put in the position of deciding the fate of this man’s life the overwhelming evidence and the lives lost would have me vote in favor of the death penalty.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/12/europe/pope-francis-turkey-armenia-genocide-reference/index.html

Pope Francis riled the people of Turkey by referring to the mass killings of the Armenians over a century ago by the Ottoman Empire as a genocide. The pope references a 2001 declaration by Pope John Paul II and the head of the Armenian Church saying “The first which is widely considered the first genocide of the 20th century.” This caused the Turks to recall their ambassador to the Vatican for “consultations”. The Turkish Foreign minister reached out to the Twitter community tweeting that the use of the word ‘genocide’ was “unacceptable” and “out of touch with historical facts and legal basis”. Turkey does not want to cut ties with the Vatican. But believes that the killing of the Armenians was just the result of intercommunal violence during World War 1.

I thought this article was interesting because of the relation to the genocide projects we just finished. The Armenian Genocide was a systematic killing of over 1.5 million people. From what we just have studied it falls well under the title of genocide, and therefore it is not unacceptable for the Pope to refer to it as one. We are taught of this event as the Armenian “Genocide” not the Armenian “intercommunal violence resulting in mass deaths”. This shows the unwillingness of the Turkish government to come to terms with tragedy of a century and take blame. The Turkish foreign minister seemed to take personal offense to the pope’s comment as if he was attacking the current state of Turkey. I think that the Pope’s comment is reasonable and did not deserve the uproar.

http://www.cnn.com/specials/latest-news-videos

In the light of the recent plane crash in the French Alps, the question of humanless piloting of planes has gained some more consideration. Statistics show that 80% of commercial crashes are the result of human error. The technology to fly planes from the ground or have the machine fully fly itself is available and used mainly for military drones. It brings up the question of are we safer without pilots? The FAA has not approved pilotless flight and has not been asked to do so yet.

Automation can fail, should we entrust solely technology with our lives? I don’t think so, or at least not yet. Humans error is indisputable, but the intentional attempts to crash planes are very few. I think that yes, we should continue researching and advancing whatever aerial technology we have and making flight as safe as it can be. I still however think that humans are needed as a safety net in case any technical problems occur on board, and that the FAA should not be in any rush to approve piloted flight.