# data[].attributes.body
I don't think the methods of making laws in our current society is the right way.  A law is a rule or guideline that is followed by the members of a particular community, often out of the fear of being fined or punished. A law is supposed to help the community, as a whole, develop, and change in a positive way. Morally, the creation of laws may sound right, but if we see the damage that is made to the individuals of a thriving society with those laws, changing our laws may be the right thing to do. Furthermore, laws aren't made in favor of everybody, and may seem quite harsh, or fragile to certain people. A law is supposed to fight for justice, or the right thing, but if the opinion of the 'correct thing' keeps changing, how can we make laws that suite all conditions, even the changing ideas, and communities? That;s why I feel that we must keep modifying and developing our laws.

# data[].attributes.body
Our current justice system is self destructive for society. It doesn't really "justify" most occurences. It's hard to find a punishment system that helps an induvivual, and many times society does not want to help some induvivuals because of either personal bias or moral values. Would many people really want to rehabilitate mass murders or rapists? Probably not. That is where a line is drawn. That is where you are derived of your human rights in terms of priority and that is a position all of us refuse to acknowledge.

- Not Harsarth

# data[].attributes.body
Reflection of the class

# data[].attributes.body
Class reflection:
Yesterday in the GP class, we watched a video where a guy explains that you should not judge people without evidence.
He was talking about a man who was blindly judged and was kept  in prison for 30 years, the the police got evidence and declared him innocent, but it was useless as he wasted 30 years of his life in prison.
After that video, maam made us play a game where 2 people should ask questions to each other and then discuss among the class.
What I learned is that justice does happen, people make justice happen and that you cant judge a person blindly and without evidence
-Marvin

# data[].attributes.body
We learned that how laws are made . i disagree with how are made. it is taking long period time to make a bill into a law my source of arguments by this link below.  And my argument we need make this process fast so that good bills can turn to a good law

- Bala mohnish

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. Have an Idea.

The first step in creating a new law -- or revising an existing law -- is to have an idea of how we can make our country stronger or better. This idea can come from anywhere, including from you!
I often meet with Delawareans and Americans who see a problem and come to me to find a way that we can fix it. I had long been concerned that dirty air emitted from a variety of sources posed serious public health and environmental threats. This problem was particularly relevant in Delaware which, along with other mid-Atlantic states, is part of America's so-called 'tail pipe' that receives a lot of other states' dirty air. In 2004, my staff and I, working with other stakeholders, seized on a possible solution to address some key sources of dirty air emissions. We recognized that many trucks and other large vehicles, including school buses, were using old, dirty diesel engines, which polluted our environment and harmed the health of our families. I decided that this was a problem that should, and could, be fixed, so I began working with my fellow , the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and private citizens to find a solution. Return to Top

2. Write a Bill.

After identifying the problem, Members of Congress work to create a law that provides a solution. Sometimes, they will work together to jointly introduce legislation with other Senators. Senators can also collaborate with members of the House of Representatives on legislation so that identical or very similar bills are introduced in both the House and the Senate. The Senator or Senators who introduce the bill are known as sponsors and they are the primary champions of the legislation. Other Senators, who did not introduce the legislation themselves but who also want to express strong support for the bill, can sign on as a cosponsor. After being introduced, the bill is sent to the Senate Parliamentarian who assigns it to a specific committee or committees for further deliberation.
I worked with Senator George V. Voinovich, a Republican from Ohio, to find a solution to the pollution created by diesel trucks and other large vehicles. After weeks of working together, we introduced the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2005 (DERA). This bill authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to establish a program to promote diesel clean-up efforts. This is accomplished by awarding funds as grants and small loans to agencies and states to help upgrade technology and equipment related to diesel vehicles and make them cleaner. Because this was commonsense legislation, 22 of our Senate colleagues, from both sides of the aisle, signed on as cosponsors. Return to Top

3. Debate in Committee

When a bill is introduced, the Senate Parliamentarian is responsible for deciding which should review the legislation. The of the committee may decide to hold a in order to examine the legislation. During a hearing, committee members invite policy experts, agency representatives, and other stakeholders to testify on how the bill will affect the country. After holding a hearing or hearings, the chair of the committee can decide to hold a during which committee members debate, modify, and ultimately vote for or against the bill. If the majority of the committee members vote favorably for the bill, it is advanced to the Senate floor, where every Senator has an opportunity to review and debate the legislation. Sometimes, less controversial pieces of legislation will be included in related larger bills as amendments in order to help speed up the legislative process.
The Senate Parliamentarian assigned DERA to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which I serve on. Because this was well crafted, bipartisan legislation our colleagues on the Committee did not deem it necessary to make any amendments to our bill. The bill was voted upon favorably by the committee on June 20, 2005, during a markup and was placed on the Senate for consideration. At this point, Senator Voinovich and I made the decision to include our bill as an Amendment into a larger energy bill that originated in the House of Representatives, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (H.R. 6). We did this to ensure that our legislation had the greatest chance of passing Congress as soon as possible. Return to Top

4. Debate on the Senate Floor

After being voted upon favorably by a committee, the bill is referred to the full Senate for a vote. Here, the Majority Leader of the Senate is responsible for deciding when to bring up a piece of legislation for a vote and what type of vote it needs. Sometimes, a non-controversial bill will be "hotlined", which means the Majority Leader and Minority Leader -- after consulting with their Senate colleagues -- agree to pass the legislation by unanimous consent and without a roll-call vote in order to save time by moving legislation more quickly. Often times, though, legislation requires more debate and must be discussed in-depth on the Senate floor. During the floor debate, every Senator is given the opportunity to speak for or against a bill and multiple votes are taken to move the bill through the legislative process. After much debate and consideration, the Majority leader may schedule a vote with all the Senators. If this route is taken, a series of votes must be taken in order for a bill to pass the Senate. First, the Senate must agree to consider the legislation by voting on a "Motion to Proceed" which indicates the start of debate. After all Senators have had the opportunity to discuss the legislation, a "Motion to End Debate" or a "Cloture Vote" is made, which then brings the Senate to one final vote on the legislation.
After including DERA as part of H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, as an Amendment, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) was responsible for deciding when the legislation was ready for a full vote in the Senate. On June 28, 2005, H.R. 6, which included our DERA Amendment, was voted on in the Senate and passed by a staggering 85-12! Return to Top

5. Work with House Colleagues

Meanwhile, the House of Representatives is responsible for introducing and voting on a companion bill of its own. Just like in the Senate, when a bill is introduced in the House, the House Parliamentarian is responsible for assigning that legislation to a specific House committee or committees for further deliberation. Sometimes the House authors will give the bill a different title and sometimes the House Parliamentarian will give the legislation a different bill number than its Senate companion. Ultimately, a law can only be passed if both the Senate and the House of Representatives introduce, debate, and vote on similar pieces of legislation.
During 2005, the House had been working hard to pass a large Energy Bill, H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which Senator Voinovich and I believed would be a great vehicle for our DERA legislation. We began working with Representative Joe Barton, a Republican from Texas and the main sponsor of H.R. 6, to include DERA into his larger energy bill. Fortunately, he saw the value of our Amendment and did not make any changes before including it in his legislation. Return to Top

6. Negotiate Compromises in Conference

Often times, the Senate bill and the House bill will have minor differences

Often times, the Senate bill and the House bill will have minor differences in their respective bills that have to be worked out before each chamber can approve the final legislative text and then send it to the President to be signed into law. When this happens, a special conference committee made up of members from both the Senate and the House will work together to come to consensus about the different provisions in the bill.
Fortunately in the case of DERA, a Conference Committee was not necessary because there were not differences in the House and Senate versions of the amendment. Return to Top

7. Send it to the President for a signature

After the conference committee resolves any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, each chamber must vote again to approve the final bill text. Once each chamber has approved the bill, the legislation is sent to the President. The President then makes the decision of whether to sign the bill into law or not. If the President signs the bill, it becomes a law. If the President refuses to sign it, the bill does not become a law. When the President refuses to sign the bill, the result is called a veto. Congress can try to overrule a veto. To do this, both the Senate and the House must vote to overrule the President's veto by a two-thirds majority. If that happens, the President's veto is overruled and the bill becomes a law.
The President signed the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (H.R. 6), including our Amendment, the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act, into law on August 8, 2005. No need for Congress to try to overrule a veto! Return to Top

8. Reauthorization

Some laws, especially laws that appropriate funding to new programs, include provisions that require Congress to decide, after a set period of time, whether the legislation is effective and should be renewed, or "reauthorized". To do this, a new bill must be introduced that renews the provisions of the law, makes any necessary changes to the original law, and offers a new timeline for how long it is active.
In 2010, I worked once again with Senator Voinovich to reauthorize the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act. Fortunately, the 2005 legislation was very successful at cleaning the air and protecting public health and the environment by effectively reducing harmful emissions from trucks and other large vehicles with old dirty diesel engines. The second time around, 31 of our Senate Colleagues signed on as cosponsors and helped move our bill through the Senate and House with unanimous support! Return to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
1. Have an Idea. The first step in creating a new law -- or revising an existing law -- is to have an idea of how we can make our country stronger or better. This idea can come from anywhere, including from you!

# data[].attributes.body
According to me, prisons do not work. Prisons are meant to be for rehabilitation for criminals but prisoners tend to go back to doing crimes.Prisoners don't have qualifications when they enter prison and due to a lack of educational programmes they are eventually unemployed when they come out of prison with a criminal record. Prisons also tend to overcrowd and they end up in a situation where there is a lack of resources and money.

-Harsarth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This trend would suggest that we have truly entered the era of mass incarceration (David Garland's concept), but does prison actually work?

Does Prison Work?

If your measure of success is rehabilitation and the prevention of re-offending then it appears not: the proven re-offending rate within one year is just under 25%, and about 37% for juveniles.

NB These are the ones we know about, and this is only re-offending within one year, the actual re-offending rates are more than double this figure and the National Audit Office, re offending costs us the equivalent of staging another Olympic Games every year.'

To put these figures in context, if a school had 25-50% of its pupils who achieved no GCSEs, OFSTED would be called in and the management sacked, yet for some reason we tolerate these levels of failure where prison is concerned.

Possible Reasons why Prison Doesn't Work

Firstly, most (as in about two thirds) have no qualifications and many prisoners have the reading age of a 10 year old when they go into jail - and lack of educational programmes in jail does little to correct this. Basically most prisoners are unemployable before they go inside, and they are doubly unemployable when they come out with a criminal record.

Secondly, our prisons are crammed full of people serving sentences for non-violent crimes, many of whom come from troubled and complex backgrounds - for example, 25% of prisoners grew up in care and over 40% have no home to go back to when they are released.

Thirdly, at the same time as the prison population doubling, in the last five years the number of staff employed in the prison estate has been cut by 30%, with the prison budget being slashed by a quarter.

The result is overcrowding and terrible conditions. It is estimated that 1/5 prisoners spends 22 hours a day in their cells; violence and drugs are rife and suicide rates are at their highest for 25 years.

This means that many jails simply aren't the kind of environments which are conducive to rehabilitation - this is the focus of many documentaries, most recently the BBC's ' Life in Wandsworth Prison '

This documentary demonstrates how under-staffing has resulted in a lack of care for prisoners, with many being locked-down for 23 hours a day, with scant mental-health care provision where required (which many prisoners do). In addition to this the documentary also shows how drugs are readily available in the jail, with weed being openly smoked in front of the guards and it's clear that many of the prisoners are victims of violence while inside.

It costs £36 000 a year to keep someone in jail, maybe this money could be better spent on social schemes to prevent offending?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
According to the government's Prison Population Statistics - as of 31 March 2016 the total prison population in England and Wales was just over 85,400. The number of people in jail has been increasing especially rapidly since Michael Howard declared that 'Prison Works' in 1993 - a mantra adopted by successive governments.

# data[].attributes.body
From the video and articles shown in the class i came to the conclusion that prisons can be more efficient in terms of:
-hygiene
-prison officials
-work done by the prisoners
-space
-inmates management.
https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/crime-justice-society/0/steps/10849

Logesh

# data[].attributes.headline
Discussion 2:Should laws be made as they are being made now?Why or why not?

# data[].attributes.subject
Discussion 2:Should laws be made as they are being made now?Why or why not?

# data[].attributes.body
Should address what arguments  you are likely to put across either to support "Why" or "Why not"
For e.g.I think laws should not continue to be made in the same way because of changing communities and changes in crime scenario in the present world.My argument is based further on the the following resource from (For e.g. The Guardian'"...which states that "................................""

# data[].attributes.body
Reflection 1:Weekly journal entries based on research and discussions on "Do prisons work"?
THE REFLECTION SHOWS:MY LEARNING FROM THE INFORMATION SHOWN OR DISCUSSED IN CLASS. For eg: Today's class discussion made me realise that prisons may not work for adolescents as they need additional support and mentoring as stated by the person in the video.I agree with this because as an adolescent I have experienced phases where I needed guidance while correcting a wrong decision".

# data[].attributes.headline
In GP class we learned  how laws are made, we were put into groups in same .  

# data[].attributes.subject
In GP class we learned  how laws are made, we were put into groups in same .  

# data[].attributes.headline
In G.P. class we learnt how to make laws and then we were split into groups and learnt how the bill goes into the senate and then signed by the president. We also did the most creative presentation in the whole class and explained it with almost every detail in it.

# data[].attributes.subject
In G.P. class we learnt how to make laws and then we were split into groups and learnt how the bill goes into the senate and then signed by the president. We also did the most creative presentation in the whole class and explained it with almost every detail in it.

# data[].attributes.body
but prisons don't work because people who did small mistakes are inside with people who made serious crimesand they can be influenced by others.

# data[].attributes.headline
In the last GP class, we learned how a bill is processed and made into a law. I had no understanding of what a law is or how it was made, before this class.  We were split into teams, and had to draw, or express our understanding of the process of a bill being made into a law, in the simplest way.

# data[].attributes.subject
In the last GP class, we learned how a bill is processed and made into a law. I had no understanding of what a law is or how it was made, before this class.  We were split into teams, and had to draw, or express our understanding of the process of a bill being made into a law, in the simplest way.

# data[].attributes.headline
In the last GP class, we learnt how laws are made, we were divided into groups and were told to research on how laws were made and present it in a creative way, therefore my team and I put it down on a flowchart  and drew a little drawing to depict the information we had written so that it is more clear. Later on, we presented the information we collected to the entire class.  

# data[].attributes.subject
In the last GP class, we learnt how laws are made, we were divided into groups and were told to research on how laws were made and present it in a creative way, therefore my team and I put it down on a flowchart  and drew a little drawing to depict the information we had written so that it is more clear. Later on, we presented the information we collected to the entire class.  

# data[].attributes.body
1. Every law starts with an idea
2.Bill is introduced
3.The bill goes to committee
4.Congress debates and votes.
5. Presidential action
6. Made into laws.
- SREEPREYA S

# data[].attributes.body
In the previous GP class I learned something which i had no clue about and something that had intrigued me for so long. It about how laws are made. I now have a clear idea on the topic. Bill is made either by a citizen or a representative, then sent to the house of representatives, after approval form them it is sent to the senate and then it only becomes a law after it's signed by the president. My doubt is that, even after creating so many laws why hasn't the crime rate decreased.

- Logesh

# data[].attributes.body
Class reflection :v
Yesterday in the GP class, we learned how laws are made and we did a  group work on the same. We had to do a research on how laws are made. We got a chart and wrote it down then we stuck it on the wall. After all that we discussed all our points.
*Bell rings*Class was over

-Anonymous :v

# data[].attributes.headline
group 2 question is missing?I'm assuming its krishna's grp....

# data[].attributes.subject
group 2 question is missing?I'm assuming its krishna's grp....

# data[].attributes.body
Class Reflection:
Today, during GP class, we learned how laws are made. We did a group work which was the fun part. The researching part was actually quite boring but I definetly learned something out of it. Now I know what a bill is and how it made into a law.

-Harsarth

# data[].attributes.body
One of our resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The video game industry is a global phenomenon. There are more than 1.2 billion gamers across the planet, with sales projected soon to pass $100bn (£65bn) per year.

The games frequently stand accused of causing violence and addiction. Yet three decades of research have failed to produce consensus among scientists.

In laboratory studies, some researchers have found an increase of about 4% in gamers' levels of aggression after playing violent games.

But other research groups have concluded factors such as family background, mental health or simply being male are more significant in determining levels of aggression.

What is certain is that science has failed to find a causal link between video games and real-world acts of violence.

But away from the controversy, a growing body of work is beginning to show these games in a different light.
Psychologists split over whether video games can make you violent
Motor skill

Dr Henk ten Cate Hoedemaker is the man behind Underground.

In the game, players must guide a child and her pet robot out of a mine.

But this is no ordinary game. Dr Hoedemaker is a keyhole surgeon, and Underground is designed to hone the skills of his profession.

Players use adapted controllers that mimic the tools used in surgery - and those who perform well in the game also do better in tests of their surgical skills.

Visual abilities

Around the world, other researchers are investigating the potential hidden benefits in video games.

At the University of Geneva, Prof Daphne Bavelier has compared the visual abilities of gamers and non-gamers.

In one test, subjects must try to keep track of the position of multiple moving objects.

She has found that individuals who play action video games perform markedly better than those who do not.

Prof Bavelier's theory is that fast action games require the player constantly to switch their attention from one part of the screen to another while also staying vigilant for other events in the environment.

This challenges the brain, making it process incoming visual information more efficiently.

Brain growth

At the Max-Planck Institute of Human Development, in Berlin, Prof Simone Kuhn also researches the effects of the video games on the brain.

In one study, she used fMRI (functional MRI) technology to study the brains of subjects as they played Super Mario 64 DS, over a period of two months.

Remarkably, she found that three areas of the brain had grown - the prefrontal cortex, right hippocampus and cerebellum - all involved in navigation and fine motor control.

The visual layout of this game is distinctive: a 3D view on the top screen and a 2D map view on the bottom.

Prof Kuhn believes having to navigate simultaneously in different ways may be what stimulates brain growth.

Keeping sharp

Arguably the most exciting field of research is exploring the potential of video games to tackle mental decline in old age.

While electronic "brain training" games have long had enormous popular appeal, there is no hard evidence playing them has any effect beyond improving your score

But at the University of California, San Francisco, Prof Adam Gazzaley and a team of video game designers have created a game with a difference: Neuroracer.

Aimed at older players, it requires individuals to steer a car while at the same time performing other tasks.

After playing the game for 12 hours, Prof Gazzaley found pensioners had improved their performance so much they were beating 20-year-olds playing it for the first time.

He also measured improvements in their working memory and attention span.

Crucially, this showed that skills improved through playing the game were transferable into the real world.

To test whether off-the-shelf games might bring similar benefits to elderly players, the BBC's Horizon programme recruited a small group of older volunteers from a sheltered housing complex in Glasgow.

They learned to play a popular karting game, clocking up about 15 hours each over five weeks. Their working memory and attention spans were tested before and after.

On average, both these scores increased by about 30%.

Although this was only a small test, larger scientific studies will continue to explore the effects of playing video games.

Prof Gazzaley believes we are only just beginning to tap their potential.

"I'm intrigued with the idea that in the future a psychiatrist or neurologist might pull out their pad and instead of writing down a drug, writes down a tablet game times two months, and uses that as a therapy, as a digital medicine," he says.

Horizon: Are Video games Really That Bad? will be shown at 16 September at 20:00 BST on BBC Two and will be on iPlayer afterwards.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The video game industry is a global phenomenon. There are more than 1.2 billion gamers across the planet, with sales projected soon to pass $100bn (£65bn) per year. The games frequently stand accused of causing violence and addiction. Yet three decades of research have failed to produce consensus among scientists.

# data[].attributes.body
Group 3 : Does long term exposure to action-adventure video games cause young adults to behave violently?

# data[].attributes.body
(http://www.huffingtonpost.in/)

our source

# data[].attributes.body
One of our resources- Harsarth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jae C. Hong/Associated Press

There's been a lot of buzz about whether video games are habit-forming, and whether parents are exaggerating when they say their teenagers are "addicted" to game playing. Now new research on children who are heavy gamers suggests parents may have something else to worry about: depression.

Two recent studies of gamers are among the first to follow large groups of teenagers over time to assess their mental health and how much time they spend playing video games. Their gaming habits were assessed at the start of the study period, and the researchers then followed them for a year or two to see how they were faring.

The results are discouraging. The latest study, published Monday in the journal Pediatrics, followed 3,000 students in the third, fourth, seventh and eighth grades in Singapore. Children who were more impulsive and less comfortable with other children spent more time playing video games, the study found. Two years later, these heavy gamers, who played an average of 31 hours a week, compared with 19 hours a week for other students, were more likely to suffer from depression, anxiety and social phobias. They were also more likely to see their grades in school drop and have worse relationships with their parents.

The findings come on the heels of another study, released last fall, that followed more than 1,000 healthy Chinese teenagers ages 13 to 18. Those who used the Internet excessively were more than twice as likely as the others to be depressed nine months later; most of the Internet use was for video games, the researchers said. That study was published in The Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine.

Even before the latest study was released, officials with the Entertainment Software Association, which represents companies that sell interactive video games, attacked it. They noted that there is no clear consensus on what defines "pathological gaming" or agreement on whether gaming can really be considered addictive. The association is challenging a state law passed in California in 2005 that bars the sales of violent video games to minors (the case was heard by the United States Supreme Court last year). They have also questioned earlier studies by the researcher, Douglas A. Gentile.

But Dr. Gentile, an associate professor of psychology at Iowa State University, says his latest results don't prove that playing video games causes depression. Rather, he says, in young people a range of mental health problems and what he calls "pathological gaming" may develop in tandem, much as illnesses like the flu and pneumonia can set off one another and lead to new problems.

"You can get the flu, and then get pneumonia, which is a different thing, but it kind of came along with the flu, and flu made you at greater risk for it," Dr. Gentile said. "And then, once you got the pneumonia, you're at risk from something else."

He says his study shows a certain chronological progression: Young people who were more impulsive, more socially inept and less empathetic to begin with were more likely to become excessive video game players. Then, once they became what he terms pathological gamers, their grades were more likely to drop, and their relationships with their parents deteriorated.

Two years later, they were more likely to suffer from depression, social phobias and anxiety than those who played video games less often. In the study, the few heavy gamers who stopped playing so much tended to show fewer symptoms of depression.

Dr. Gentile suggested that teenagers who are experiencing problems may retreat into gaming, and that the gaming may, in turn, increase their depression and isolation. He says that parents should regulate their children's use of video games and trust their instincts on what constitutes excessive use, something that his critics from the gaming industry also agree on.

"We've always said these games should be used in moderation and should be a part of a well-rounded lifestyle, along with going outside to play, and reading, and doing schoolwork," said Dan Hewitt, a spokesman for the Entertainment Software Association.

Many teenagers experience mental health problems and can benefit from psychological or medical help, Mr. Hewitt said, but added, "Why point out their game playing?"

That's where Dr. Gentile disagrees. A gaming habit cannot be ignored, he said. Few youths spontaneously drop the heavy gaming, and even if it's not the initial trigger for depression, he said, "It looks like it's an independent actor, not just a symptom of something else."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jae C. Hong/Associated Press There's been a lot of buzz about whether video games are habit-forming, and whether parents are exaggerating when they say their teenagers are "addicted" to game playing. Now new research on children who are heavy gamers suggests parents may have something else to worry about: depression.

# data[].attributes.body
Group 1 RQ: How does technology aid in resolving social issues among women?

# data[].attributes.body
Group 4 RQ: Do the advantages of gaming overweigh the disadvantages among teenagers?