Tuesday, May 24, 2011

What would I Do?

If I had time left to improve our game, what would I do................ I really couldn't do anything to improve it....... I already have the bonus level done with velocity questions............ We didn't have but one suggestion and that was it...........

Bonus Level

I really can't think of anything else....... we already got the suggestions done......... I think we're done here........... See Ya!

Friday, May 6, 2011

Partner 5-6-11

Matt has done a first-class amount of work this year. He has done Help, About, Loading with my help, Title, 3 levels, 2 1/2 cutscenes and helped me on credits. Matt, above all else , such as us not getting along that well, has come a long way since the begining of the year. The reason I cannot do a learning log is because my page is flipped up. I'll try to do one but I can't promise anything. Our grade should be at least an A (104%), Just kiddin'. See ya next week.

Monday, May 2, 2011

What We Have To Do 5-2-11

NOTHING!!!!!!!! OUR GAME IS DONE!!!!!!!!!!! Granted, We still have to upload it, but other than that... WE ARE DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Friday, April 22, 2011

FINAL GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OUR GAME IS DONE, OUR GAME IS DONE, OUR GAME IS DONE!!!!!!!
It never felt so good to say DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yesterday Matt and I FINALLY FINISHED OUR GAME, but now some bad news... WE CAN'T GET IT UPLOADED... I think it's stupid that they a limit to how big a file can be!!!! PLUS MY PAGE IS MESSED UP!!!!! AND GUESS WHAT???
It's Friday, Friday
Finally it's friday
Everyone here is lookin' foward to the weekend.
TGIF!!!!!!!!! AND TODAY AT 11:30 starts the time everyone here has been waitin' for.... SPRING BREAK!!!!!!!

Friday, April 15, 2011

What We Have To Do Before Next Thursday

Before Next THURSDAY We have to get Level 4 done and put everything together.... Matthew and I need a break! Not very much to do is it? Well, get this next part... WE HAVE TO CUT THE GAME INTO 3 PARTS!!!!!!!!!

Monday, April 11, 2011

Changes To Game

The Changes we made to our game are that we made the questions harder, put in more interactivity and made put more learning in the cutscenes. We made the questions harder by making a graph and putting a line on it. The player has to use the formulas for slope and figure it out. We put more interactivity into the game by making cutscenes and that the player can push buttons to go to the next talking scene. We put more learning into the cutscenes by making James teach Jimmy throughout the game.

Friday, April 1, 2011

Game Stats 4-1-11

Today is FRIDAY APRIL FOOLS DAY and of all fridays this is the BEST! Anyway as of 4-1-11 our game is almost finished... only thing is the platforms still don't work... other than that were almost done. Yesterday we evaluated each others games and we got a lot of good stuff, but some bad stuff too... one good thing is that the other gamers like our graphics... another is that they like the music... and finally they like our buttons! One bad thing is that we need to combine our files and redo codes and everything........UGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH! Anyway that is where we are with our game........ Bye.

Friday, March 25, 2011

Using Time wisely

To better use my time, I will look for places on the internet to where i can get someone to fix the file... and thats all.

Friday, March 18, 2011

Overcome and Current Obstacles

Today I will be discussing obstacles I've overcame and my current obstacles I'm facing now.
The biggest obstacle my team has is that we can't get the platform code working, which is a current and reoccurring obstacle. A few obstacles my team has overcome is that the jumping code is working, but we won't be able to know if it will work with platforms until we get the platforms to work.
Another is that the questions in the game have a lot more information now than they used to have in the old questions.
Finally, the scenes in the game, Help, Instructions and Fun Facts, are working now since they hadn't been working in the original.
In Conclusion, we still have a lot to do before the game is done, but trust me, THE GAME WILL BE DONE!!!!!

Friday, March 11, 2011

Progress to goals!

The progress I have made to my goal is that I have us jumping and moving but the platforms aren't working.... UUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Friday, March 4, 2011

My Goals

My goals for our game is to get level1 redone, and start working on level 2 today. The reason we had to redo ther levels is because it was like a quiz game.

Friday, February 25, 2011

The two sides of our game.

Our game has its good and bad sides. Three good things and one bad thing is that:
1. our game is fun to play
2. our game teaches math
3. our game has really cool facts.

Bad: We don't have all the scenes and interactivity done yet.

Friday, February 18, 2011

How the game is going


On this day of the 18th of February, 2011 I worked of changing and making new scenes for our game. First I worked on the "About" and "Instructions Scene". Then I worked on the levels and Matthew worked on the Cut scenes. I can't think of anything else... so Bye.

Friday, February 11, 2011

How Far I've Got

Since the presentation, I have made a lot of progress along with Matt99. We have got the cut scenes, levels, and very other scene almost complete. I had a good idea of making the "driving" scene 3D. I can't think of anything else so I'm done.

Friday, February 4, 2011

Game Demo

The Game Demo has finally been done!!! Took about a month. Our (The Harley's) Game Demo helped us a lot to see what we really need to do on the game. First off, we need to make the questions harder and make them more slope related. Next, we need to make when Jimmy is going to jump over a gap to make each ramp a different size and make a point on the other side where the player has to jump to and you can't go over this point of below this point. Finally, we need to make the cut scenes, instructions, fun facts and credits more informative (excluding credits). Buh-Bye For Now. ~Chuckie~

Friday, December 10, 2010

Global Progress

The progress I have had so far is that I have been making all 5 levels and the final cut scene. I need to get the final cut scene done so I can make a spanish version.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Game Demo

This Week we have been working on game demos. A game demo is when you finish about 4 or 5 scenes in a game and post it to the wiki or internet. The game demo for me and my team (The Harleys) was prety easy. Matthew (Matt99) and I (Chuck455) work on seperate scenes, he works in the cut scenes, and I work on the levels.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Adding Sound!

The adding aound unit was very challenging to me because I couldn't find ANY music or sounds.

Friday, November 12, 2010

Flash

Throughout the years I have been in this class I've loved working on flash. The challenges and struggles the triumphs and failures. the actionscript is especially challenging.

Friday, October 29, 2010

My Struggles, Successes, and what I look forward to.

All my struggles in Globaloria all have one thing in common: Sleep and ActionScript. I never get enough sleep at night (yes i go to sleep late but that's no reason for me to get a lot of sleep) My baby cousin keeps me up at night because my 16 yr old cousin stays with my mommaw. I get about 4-5 hours of sleep each night (Falling asleep at school included). The ActionScript is being just like last year! It's not wroking, I can find a suitable code and I can't remember how to make a hit test to where when your character hits an answer it goes to a new scene. >.< . The Successes right now are us getting our Pages and Team Page done. That's all. I look forward to getting this game and this year over with! SEE YA LATES!

Friday, October 22, 2010

Adding Buttons


WEEGEE!!!

This unit is about adding buttons to the game and linking them to another scene. This unit was the easiest so far.

Friday, October 15, 2010

Adding a Scene

Matthew and I started yesterday by adding scenes to our game. In the scenes we added Matt's Gy walks over to my guy and they start talking. We hope to have the game finished by April.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Drawing A Scene

People think that Globaloria is too hard or too easy but that is sadly not the case of the blog today. Yesterday we started the "Drawing a Scene" Unit and Matthew and I started on our game. O.o! I just thought of something. TODAY THE KIDS THAT GOT MASTERY OR ABOVE GET TO GO TO THE YMCA!!!!! The Drawing a Scene unit is easy because all you have to do is get on flash and draw... EASY A!! Well Ima get off. See Ya'll Later!

Friday, September 24, 2010

Imagining My Game

"Our Game is about a biker needing to get to a Harley Davidson Repair Shop."

I'm really excited to get this game done and try to win a laptop.

Friday, September 17, 2010

Mini Game Project

Well the Globaloria Class of 2010-2011 had to do the Minigame Project (For me, Again) this year. The Actionscript this year barely worked, but we got it done.

Friday, September 10, 2010

Choosin' A Topic

My Topic Is Racing and Math. The Reason I chose this topic is because I'm in the STEM Competition this year and it deals with math. I chose racing because it seemed cool to have a racing game.

Friday, September 3, 2010

Playing To Learn


This Past Week We Have Been Doing The Playing To Learn Unit In Globaloria And I have Played Gravitee and Zeitgiest. They Are Very Fun Games. Gravitee (As Shown to The Left) Is About you playing golf in space. In this game you learn about gravitational pull and physics, also you can have a lot of fun having a competition between you and your friends. Zeitgiest is about a time traveler given the mission to save the past. In this game you can learn about Egypt. Try Both of these games! Later!

Monday, August 30, 2010

2010-2011 Globaloria Year. What I Hope To Do!

What I Hope To Do In Globaloria This Year! I hope To Make A Winning Game with Matthew This Year Named "The Great Mathcycle" Based on Harley Davidson Motorcycle!

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Summary of the Year

Globaloria is the most fun I've had this year. Making games, blogging and getting on laptops. On May 27, 2010 we had the final presentations which you can veiw at the link here Linkhttp://www.viddler.com/explore/ingridabarker/videos/40/. They went well for everyone. Every Team and Game is listed here.
The Spikers: Rock for the Constitution
The Dancing Goombas of Doom!!!: Lewis and Clark: The Great Journey
Tigers: The Branch Game
Smarties: The Messengers
The Blond Chicks: Court's Rights
Halo Machines: Courthouse Trivia
~THE FOX RACERS~: The Racing Pursuit

After the Presentations we had to publish our Final Games on the Games Gallery. http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/srmswiki/index.php/Special:GlobaloriaGamesGallery

Monday, May 24, 2010

I'm thinking about signing up for PCA (Power Chord Academy)

This is a Summer Rock Camp in multiple cities across the USA. I hope to be attending the DC Summer Camp from July 22-24 but 4-H might effect me going. This 3-Day Camp is called OVERDRIVE! This seems like a awesome camp to go to and I signed up for the Metal Course of the Program.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Who I commented on...

So I just got done commenting on Quintin and Holly's Blogs. Their blogs are pretty good. http://quintinglobaloria.blogspot.com
http://hollysglife.blogspot.com

Thursday, April 22, 2010

The One Hard Thing To Teach About

I think when we were making our game the hardest to teach about was the 10 amendments we are going to teach about. If the player earns 500,000 points at the end then it goes to a scene where it shows the player's avatar playing something on a guitar and at the end the player holds up the guitar and lightning comes out the top then it goes to credits. Throughout the game players learn about the amendments and solve 3 cases, 2 having to do with amendments and 1 just for fun. "Rock For The Constitution" is an education game wrapped around a fun experience for kids that haven't played Guitar Hero, Rock Band, DDR ect. ect. http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/srmswiki/index.php/Team:The_Spikers
http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/srmswiki/index.php/User:POPCORN99
http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/srmswiki/index.php/User:Chuck455

Right now we are trying to find the code to make a player, when a certain score is reached, go to the next scene....... If anyone can help us find the code please leave a message with the code.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Politics

If you ask me politics lie about what they are going to do. Obama has done a lot of with just a little. George Bush barely did anything other than trying to get soldiers out of Iraq and Iran... Obama even did that! If I was President I would try to make peace with other countries. I know Obama has been trying to make peace and it's not working, I just say "Try, Try Again". News sources like WVVA, CNN, USA, FOX and sometimes you can look at YAHOO NEWS for current events such as that girl that got rescued this week from Alligators... I can't remember her whole name... I remember her last name though it was something like Bloom or something... now I remember her name... it was Nadia Bloom... I think. http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view.bg?articleid=1247417&srvc=rss

http://www.cnn.com

http://news.yahoo.com

http://www.USAtoday.com

http://www.WVVA.com

http://www.foxnews.com

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

M.C.E.B.P.4

Aluminum Fighters
SHHS: 53,595 Infected Lawyers.
This game teaches about the amendments, 2nd to be more exact. This game teaches you about the 2nd amendment through a fun kind of shooter game is how I would describe it. There is a maze, quiz and a surprise at the end. I can't wait for the final game to be ready. If the Aluminum Fighters have entered their game in the Competition, every other team, GOOD LUCK.

Monday, March 29, 2010

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Game Idea & Factors of Chosen Team

The Smelly Closets: What are they Thinking, RTC High School. Their game is to teach about politics. The design plan aims "Bull's-Eye" at the subject of the game. Their audience is Middle School and younger High School Students. I can't wait until they finish their game, so us at SRMS can play it. Link to where I saw what they are going to do http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/rtcwiki/index.php/User:VMal/Projects. I wouldn't take anything from this game, it's one-of-a-kind. I don't think they should add anything to their game, it is fine as is. What I like about their game is that it teaches about politics. The way they teach about politics is that througout the game you play crossword puzzles, find a word puzzles and others in an educational way. If you have entered your game [The Smelly Closets] GOOD LUCK!

Friday, March 19, 2010

Civic Engagement Blog Prompt 2

The paper prototype is what I'm focusing on. We had to really cooperate with each other for this one, and we did pretty well. We used more than what we needed for it but it turned out okay. Garrett and I went into the computer lab with our teacher and videoed our paper prototype.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Shortening Our Topic

To shorten our game Garrett and I shortened our focusing to the most important amendment, the 1st amendment. 1st Amendment- Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion, Assembly and Petition. Which all of the songs in our game, every song in the world has the Freedom of Speech in it, because when you sing you voice your opinion to the world. Like the Song "Kryptonite" (used in the game) is about a guy who has probably lost a girl in his life. So he wrote a song and it went something like this http://artists.letssingit.com/3-doors-down-lyrics-kryptonite-43fzvxb. Writing songs isn't that hard... I've wrote lots of songs.

Monday, March 15, 2010

Game Presentations






I believe Garrett and I did well on our game presentations, it went very swimmingly. I think if I would have changed the color of the text in the background of some of the slides it would have went more smoothly. My computer hasn't been acting up as much lately... although it still acts up A LOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's about all I say about the Game Presentations.

Friday, March 5, 2010

How well I think the Average US American Citizen Understands Ideals

Well the average American citizen, I don't think that they understand the Ideals very well.

Their Voting right: I believe the people understand their voting right well. Not a lot, but good.


Their Origins/History of key ideas and value: Well some people don't understand how America came to be, some people think that Christopher Columbus discovered America, he might have, no one knows for sure. Here's what I have to say, In 1497, the Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci discovered a new country. He named it America after himself.

Their Rights and Freedoms: The Average US American citizen barley knows their rights and freedoms, which is what I'm trying to teach in Mine and Garrett's Game. Like some people don't know what to do if a policeman comes to your house and tries to arrest you without a warrant, because they can not do this.

Monday, March 1, 2010

What is up with all the 'Quakes today?

I'm sure you've heard by now about the Chile Quake. Well what is is up with the Quakes today! Here is a list of Quakes from 2010.

  1. Haiti Quake
  2. Chile Quake

What's Next a W.V. Quake?

Well actually we are pretty lucky not to have earthquakes in McDowell County but with all of the Earthquakes happening near us today we are waiting for one to hit. There has been a lot of talk on how to help Chile and Haiti, like going to http://www.redcross.org or http://www.helphaitinow.org.

Info On Team and Game.

My name is Charles, I am 13 years of age. I'm in "The Spikers" Globaloria Team with Garrett. Our game's name is "Rock for the Constitution". The Category it fits in is the Citizenship Category. Our game teaches about the first 10 Amendments, so kids can learn about their rights and freedoms. Like, for example, a cop comes to your house and tries to seize you or your parents (If your a kid.), and you played the game the night before, and they don't have a warrant for your or your parents arrest, then you'd know without a warrant they can't arrest you. If you've played Guitar Hero 1, 2, 3, 80's, Areosmith, Metallica, World Tour, Smash Hits, Van Halen, 5, Rock Band or Dance Dance Revolution, then you'll know what you have to do to play our game. We'll be using 5 songs in the game, patriotic that is, even if we have to make them. http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/srmswiki/index.php/Team:The_Spikers

Friday, January 29, 2010

Plagiarism Problems






When you write a story that someone else has writen or copy someone else's work onto a sheet of paper or onto a Blog you can get sued OR EVEN GET SENT TO JAIL. Copyright law is when nobody (except people who ask) can use anybody else's work such as an author's story, a bands song or a composer's composition. Fair Use is when you can only use a limited amount of work from another person. Public Domain is when you can use work from another person without permission. Plus you can only use 10% of copyrighted work of text, music and videos.

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Daytime Moon

Today at 5:43 I went outside with my Galileo Telescope and wanted to see is it the moon you see in the sky in the Daytime. Well some people might think it crazy going out in 35 Degrees but it was for a good reason, also people think it is Venus or Mars, but today I proved them WRONG! The Figure you see in the sky is, of course, the Moon. Proving the Moon can be seen in the Daytime. Also while I was testing the theory I fell and twisted my ankle. So now I am in agonizing PAIN!!!! So I laugh at the people who think it is Venus or Mars in the Sky.... HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!

Friday, January 22, 2010

N.Y.R (New Years Resolution)


My N.Y.R is to finish the game in time for the deadline. I'm hoping that Garrett's and my game gets at least top 3 in the 1st Annual Globaloria Competition. I, personally, can't wait till the school year is over, but not until we get our game finished. Globaloria is a fun class but when the Actionscript doesn't work I could throw it out the window. 2010 is going to be a good year. Flash is cooperating good so far now because it is close to the deadline.
At the beginning of the year Flash would not cooperate with me.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Haiti Quake














































PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti - Turning pickup trucks into ambulances and doors into stretchers, Haitians on Thursday frantically struggled to save those injured in the earthquake.
Help began arriving early Thursday when an Air China plane carrying a Chinese search-and-rescue team, medics and aid landed at Port-au-Prince airport, and more than 50 people in orange jumpsuits got out accompanied by trained dogs.
The U.S. and other nations said they were sending food, water, medical supplies to assist the Western Hemisphere's poorest nation, where the international Red Cross estimated 3 million people — a third of the population — may need emergency relief.
In the streets of the capital, survivors set up camps amid piles of salvaged goods, including food being scavenged from the rubble.
"It's the most horrific thing I've ever seen," Bob Poff, a Salvation Army worker in Port-au-Prince, told MSNBC. "We have to get food and water" quickly, he said, in describing conditions that range from stifling heat to numerous aftershocks. "We're trying to stay alive."
If there were any organized efforts to distribute food or water, they were not visible Wednesday.
The aid group Doctors Without Borders treated wounded at two hospitals that withstood the quake and set up tent clinics elsewhere to replace its damaged facilities. Cuba, which already had hundreds of doctors in Haiti, treated injured in field hospitals.
President Barack Obama promised an all-out rescue and humanitarian effort including the military and civilian emergency teams from across the U.S. The aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson was expected to arrive off the coast Thursday and the Navy said the amphibious assault ship USS Bataan had been ordered to sail as soon as possible with a 2,000-member Marine unit.
"We have to be there for them in their hour of need," Obama said.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Thursday that the administration will provide long-term assistance to help Haiti recover.
"This is going to be a long-term effort," Clinton said on NBC's Today show. "We have the immediate crisis of trying to save those lives that can be saved, to deal with the injured... to try to provide food, water, medical supplies, some semblance of shelter."
Aid workers head to HaitiThe global relief effort picked up steam Thursday with a British flight carrying a government assessment team and 71 rescue specialists along with heavy equipment arriving in the neighboring Dominican Republic. The crew prepared to head to Haiti. A Los Angeles County Fire Department 72-member search team left for Haiti late Wednesday.
The United Nations released $10 million from its emergency funds, even as U.N. forces in Haiti struggled with their own losses. The U.N. headquarters building collapsed, and at least 16 personnel are confirmed dead, with up to 150 still missing, including mission head Hedi Annabi of Tunisia and his chief deputy, Luis Carlos da Costa.
"We'll be using whatever roads are passable to get aid to Port-au-Prince, and if possible we'll bring helicopters in," said Emilia Casella, a spokeswoman for the U.N. food agency in Geneva.
Venezuela's government said it would send a military plane with canned foods, medicine and drinking water and provide 50 rescue workers. Mexico, which suffered an earthquake in 1985 that killed some 10,000 people, planned to send doctors, search and rescue dogs and infrastructure damage experts.
Italy said it was sending a C-130 cargo plane with a field hospital and emergency medical personnel as well as a team to assess aid needs. France said 65 clearing specialists, with six sniffer dogs, and two doctors and two nurses were leaving.
There was no estimate on how many people were killed by Tuesday's magnitude-7 quake. Haitian President Rene Preval said the toll could be in the thousands. Leading Sen. Youri Latortue told The Associated Press the number could be 500,000, but conceded that nobody really knew.
"Let's say that it's too early to give a number," Preval said told CNN.
'Everything hurts'Survivors used sledgehammers and their bare hands to try to find victims in the rubble. In Petionville, next to the capital, people dug through a collapsed shopping center, tossing aside mattresses and office supplies. More than a dozen cars were entombed, including a U.N. truck.
Vicente Raimundo / AFP - Getty Images
An aerial view of the destroyed Port-au-Prince cathedral following Tuesday's earthquake.
Nearby, about 200 survivors, including many children, huddled in a theater parking lot using sheets to rig makeshift tents and shield themselves from the sun in 90-degree heat.
Police officers carried the injured in their pickup trucks. Wisnel Occilus, a 24-year-old student, was wedged between two other survivors in a truck bed headed to a police station. He was in an English class when the magnitude-7 quake struck at 4:53 p.m. and the building collapsed.
"The professor is dead. Some of the students are dead, too," said Occilus, who suspected he had several broken bones. "Everything hurts."
Other survivors carried injured to hospitals in wheelbarrows and on stretchers fashioned from doors.
Bodies lay everywhere in Port-au-Prince: tiny children next to schools, women in rubble-strewn streets with stunned expressions frozen on their faces, men hidden beneath plastic tarps and cotton sheets. Balancing suitcases and belongings on their heads, people streamed on foot into the Haitian countryside, where wooden and cinderblock shacks showed little sign of damage. Ambulances and U.N. trucks raced in the opposite direction, toward Port-au-Prince.
Calls from victims seeking help from emergency services weren't getting through because systems that connect different phone networks were not working, said officials from a telecommunications provider in Haiti.
Calls were being placed sometimes 15 to 20 times from the same phone, which was "painful to watch," said Jyoti Mahurkar-Thombre, Alcatel-Lucent's general manager of wireless voice.
About 3,000 police and international peacekeepers cleared debris, directed traffic and maintained security in the capital. But law enforcement was stretched thin even before the quake and would be ill-equipped to deal with major unrest. The U.N.'s 9,000-member peacekeeping force sent patrols across the capital's streets while securing the airport, port and main buildings.
Looting began immediately after the quake, with people seen carrying food from collapsed buildings. Inmates were reported to have escaped from the damaged main prison in Port au Prince, said Elisabeth Byrs, a U.N. humanitarian spokeswoman in Geneva.
It was unclear whether the U.S. ground troops heading this way would be used for security operations as well as humanitarian efforts.
No one sparedPort-au-Prince's ruined buildings fell on both the poor and the prominent: The body of Archbishop Joseph Serge Miot, 63, was found in the ruins of his office, said the Rev. Pierre Le Beller at Miot's order, the Saint Jacques Missionary Center in Landivisiau, France.
Haitian Senate President Kelly Bastien was rescued from the collapsed Parliament building and taken to a hospital in the neighboring Dominican Republic. The president of Haiti's Citibank was also among the survivors being treated there, said Rafael Sanchez Espanol, director of the Homs Hospital in Santiago.
A U.S. Coast Guard helicopter evacuated four critically injured U.S. Embassy staff to the hospital at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where the military has been detaining suspected terrorists.
The U.S. Embassy had no confirmed reports of deaths among the estimated 40,000 to 45,000 Americans who live in Haiti, but many were struggling to find a way out of the country.
The International Committee of the Red Cross said Thursday it has launched a Web site to help Haitians find loved ones missing in the quake.
Robert Zimmerman, deputy head of the group's tracing unit, said people in Haiti and abroad can use the site to register the names of missing relatives.
Dead line the streetsAs dusk fell Wednesday, thousands of people gathered on blankets outside the crumpled presidential palace, including hundreds of women who waved their hands and sang hymns in a joyful, even defiant tone.
Click for related content
http://twitter.com/BreakingNews/haiti-quake Field Notes: NYC Haitians wait, prayU.S., world rush aid to HaitiWant to help? List of charitiesInteractive graphic: What causes quakesDiscuss what individuals can do to help
Ricardo Dervil, 29, said he decided to join the crowd because he was worried about aftershocks and was tired of seeing dead bodies.
"I was listening to the radio and they were saying to stay away from buildings," he said. "All I was doing was walking the street and seeing dead people."
Haiti seems especially prone to catastrophe — from natural disasters like hurricanes, storms, floods and mudslides to crushing poverty, unstable governments, poor building standards and low literacy rates.
The quake struck at 4:53 p.m. on Tuesday, centered 10 miles west of Port-au-Prince at a depth of only 5 miles, the U.S. Geological Survey said. USGS geophysicist Kristin Marano called it the strongest earthquake since 1770 in what is now Haiti.
Most of Haiti's 9 million people are desperately poor, and after years of political instability the country has no real construction standards. In November 2008, following the collapse of a school in Petionville, the mayor of Port-au-Prince estimated about 60 percent of buildings were shoddily built and unsafe in normal circumstances.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

My Research

What I have researched for our game is about cases we can use in our game like the Tinker Case of November 12, 1968 to February 24, 1969 which was on the first amendment. A good case on the second amendment is the case of U.S. v. Cruikshank and this was the first case in which the Supreme Court had the opportunity to interpret the Second Amendment. The Court recognized that the right of the people to keep and bear arms was a right which existed prior to the Constitution when it stated that such a right "is not a right granted by the Constitution, neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." The indictment in Cruikshank charged, inter alia, a conspiracy by Klansmen to prevent blacks from exercising their civil rights, including the bearing of arms for lawful purposes. The Court held, however, that because the right to keep and bear arms existed independent of the Constitution, and the Second Amendment guaranteed only that the right shall not be infringed by Congress, the federal government had no power to punish a violation of the right by a private individual; rather, citizens had "to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow-citizens" of their right to keep and bear arms to the police power of the state. It is not clear whether the United States violated the Third Amendment during the War of 1812 and the Civil War, when it required US citizens to house troops, because virtually no legal action arose from the practice. There is only one relatively significant federal case that rests on the terms of the Third Amendment, Engblom v. Carey. In Engblom, a group of New York state prison corrections officers were unceremoniously evicted from prison housing at Mid-Orange Correctional Facility when they staged a strike. Their residences were subsequently used to house members of the National Guard. Two corrections officers argued that their Third Amendment rights had been violated, but the courts granted defendants' (a variety of New York government officials) motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case on the grounds that the Plaintiffs had no standing because the homes belonged to the prison. More Information on the Tinker Case. This case never reached the US Supreme Court. Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam. They sought nominal damages and an injunction against a regulation that the respondents had promulgated banning the wearing of armbands. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed by an equally divided court.
1. In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth.
2. First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment.
3. A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
DISPOSITION: 383 F.2d 988, reversed and remanded.
MR. JUSTICE FORTAS delivered the opinion of the Court.
Petitioner John F. Tinker, 15 years old, and petitioner Christopher Eckhardt, 16 years old, attended high schools in Des Moines, Iowa. Petitioner Mary Beth Tinker, John's sister, was a 13-year-old student in junior high school.
In December 1965, a group of adults and students in Des Moines held a meeting at the Eckhardt home. The group determined to publicize their objections to the hostilities in Vietnam and their support for a truce by wearing black armbands during the holiday season and by fasting on December 16 and New Year's Eve. Petitioners and their parents had previously engaged in similar activities, and they decided to participate in the program.
The principals of the Des Moines schools became aware of the plan to wear armbands. On December 14, 1965, they met and adopted a policy that any student wearing an armband to school would be asked to remove it, and if he refused he would be suspended until he returned without the armband. Petitioners were aware of the regulation that the school authorities adopted.
On December 16, Mary Beth and Christopher wore black armbands to their schools. John Tinker wore his armband the next day. They were all sent home and suspended from school until they would come back without their armbands. They did not return to school until after the planned period for wearing armbands had expired--that is, until after New Year's Day.
This complaint was filed in the United States District Court by petitioners, through their fathers, under § 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code. It prayed for an injunction restraining the respondent school officials and the respondent members of the board of directors of the school district from disciplining the petitioners, and it sought nominal damages. After an evidentiary hearing the District Court dismissed the complaint. It upheld [505] the constitutionality of the school authorities' action on the ground that it was reasonable in order to prevent disturbance of school discipline. 258 F.Supp. 971 (1966). The court referred to but expressly declined to follow the Fifth Circuit's holding in a similar case that the wearing of symbols like the armbands cannot be prohibited unless it "materially and substantially interfere[s] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school." Burnside v. Byars, 363 F.2d 744, 749 (1966).
On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit considered the case en banc. The court was equally divided, and the District Court's decision was accordingly affirmed, without opinion. 383 F.2d 988 (1967). We granted certiorari. 390 U.S. 942 (1968).
I
The District Court recognized that the wearing of an armband for the purpose of expressing certain views is the type of symbolic act that is within the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. See West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943); Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359 (1931). Cf. Thornhill v. Alabama, 310 U.S. 88 (1940); Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963); Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131 (1966). As we shall discuss, the wearing of armbands in the circumstances of this case was entirely divorced from actually or potentially disruptive conduct by those participating in it. It was closely akin to "pure speech" [506] which, we have repeatedly held, is entitled to comprehensive protection under the First Amendment. Cf. Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536, 555 (1965); Adderley v. Florida, 385 U.S. 39 (1966).
First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students. It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years. In Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923), and Bartels v. Iowa, 262 U.S. 404 (1923), this Court, in opinions by Mr. Justice McReynolds, held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents States from forbidding the teaching of a foreign language to young students. Statutes to this effect, the Court held, unconstitutionally interfere with the liberty of teacher, student, and parent. [note 2] See also Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 [507] (1925); West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943); McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948); Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183, 195 (1952) (concurring opinion); Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234 (1957); Shelton v. Tucker, 364 U.S. 479, 487 (1960); Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962); Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589, 603 (1967); Epperson v. Arkansas, ante, p. 97 (1968).
In West Virginia v. Barnette, supra, this Court held that under the First Amendment, the student in public school may not be compelled to salute the flag. Speaking through Mr. Justice Jackson, the Court said:
"The Fourteenth Amendment, as now applied to the States, protects the citizen against the State itself and all of its creatures--Boards of Education not excepted. These have, of course, important, delicate, and highly discretionary functions, but none that they may not perform within the limits of the Bill of Rights. That they are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes." 319 U.S., at 637.
On the other hand, the Court has repeatedly emphasized the need for affirming the comprehensive authority of the States and of school officials, consistent with fundamental constitutional safeguards, to prescribe and control conduct in the schools. See Epperson v. Arkansas, supra, at 104; Meyer v. Nebraska, supra, at 402. Our problem lies in the area where students in the exercise of First Amendment rights collide with the rules of the school authorities.
II
The problem posed by the present case does not relate to regulation of the length of skirts or the type of clothing, [508] to hair style, or deportment. Cf. Ferrell v. Dallas Independent School District, 392 F.2d 697 (1968); Pugsley v. Sellmeyer, 158 Ark. 247, 250 S. W. 538 (1923). It does not concern aggressive, disruptive action or even group demonstrations. Our problem involves direct, primary First Amendment rights akin to "pure speech."
The school officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, passive expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance on the part of petitioners. There is here no evidence whatever of petitioners' interference, actual or nascent, with the schools' work or of collision with the rights of other students to be secure and to be let alone. Accordingly, this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students.
Only a few of the 18,000 students in the school system wore the black armbands. Only five students were suspended for wearing them. There is no indication that the work of the schools or any class was disrupted. Outside the classrooms, a few students made hostile remarks to the children wearing armbands, but there were no threats or acts of violence on school premises.
The District Court concluded that the action of the school authorities was reasonable because it was based upon their fear of a disturbance from the wearing of the armbands. But, in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949); and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom--this kind of openness--that is the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society.
In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained. Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749.
In the present case, the District Court made no such finding, and our independent examination of the record fails to yield evidence that the school authorities had reason to anticipate that the wearing of the armbands would substantially interfere with the work of the school or impinge upon the rights of other students. Even an official memorandum prepared after the suspension that listed the reasons for the ban on wearing the armbands made no reference to the anticipation of such disruption.
On the contrary, the action of the school authorities appears to have been based upon an urgent wish to avoid the controversy which might result from the expression, even by the silent symbol of armbands, of opposition to this Nation's part in the conflagration in Vietnam. It is revealing, in this respect, that the meeting at which the school principals decided to issue the contested regulation was called in response to a student's statement to the journalism teacher in one of the schools that he wanted to write an article on Vietnam and have it published in the school paper.
It is also relevant that the school authorities did not purport to prohibit the wearing of all symbols of political or controversial significance. The record shows that students in some of the schools wore buttons relating to national political campaigns, and some even wore the Iron Cross, traditionally a symbol of Nazism. The order prohibiting the wearing of armbands did not extend to these. Instead, a particular symbol--black armbands worn to exhibit opposition to this Nation's involvement [511] in Vietnam--was singled out for prohibition. Clearly, the prohibition of expression of one particular opinion, at least without evidence that it is necessary to avoid material and substantial interference with schoolwork or discipline, is not constitutionally permissible.
In our system, state-operated schools may not be enclaves of totalitarianism. School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students in school as well as out of school are "persons" under our Constitution. They are possessed of fundamental rights which the State must respect, just as they themselves must respect their obligations to the State. In our system, students may not be regarded as closed-circuit recipients of only that which the State chooses to communicate. They may not be confined to the expression of those sentiments that are officially approved. In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views. As Judge Gewin, speaking for the Fifth Circuit, said, school officials cannot suppress "expressions of feelings with which they do not wish to contend." Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749.
In Meyer v. Nebraska, supra, at 402, Mr. Justice McReynolds expressed this Nation's repudiation of the principle that a State might so conduct its schools as to "foster a homogeneous people." He said:
"In order to submerge the individual and develop ideal citizens, Sparta assembled the males at seven into barracks and intrusted their subsequent education and training to official guardians. Although such measures have been deliberately approved by men of great genius, their ideas touching the relation between individual and State were wholly different from those upon which our institutions rest; and it hardly will be affirmed that any legislature could impose such restrictions upon the people of a State without doing violence to both letter and spirit of the Constitution."
This principle has been repeated by this Court on numerous occasions during the intervening years. In Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589, 603, MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, speaking for the Court, said:
"'The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools.' Shelton v. Tucker, [364 U.S. 479,] at 487. The classroom is peculiarly the 'marketplace of ideas.' The Nation's future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth 'out of a multitude of tongues, [rather] than through any kind of authoritative selection.'"
The principle of these cases is not confined to the supervised and ordained discussion which takes place in the classroom. The principal use to which the schools are dedicated is to accommodate students during prescribed hours for the purpose of certain types of activities. Among those activities is personal intercommunication among the students. This is not only an inevitable part of the process of attending school; it is also an important part of the educational process. A student's rights, therefore, do not embrace merely the classroom hours. When he is in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours, he may express his opinions, even on controversial subjects like the conflict in Vietnam, if he does so without "materially and substantially interfering with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school" and without colliding with the rights of others. Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749. But conduct by the student, in class or out of it, which for any reason--whether it stems from time, place, or type of behavior--materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech. Cf. Blackwell v. Issaquena County Board of Education, 363 F.2d 749 (C. A. 5th Cir. 1966).
Under our Constitution, free speech is not a right that is given only to be so circumscribed that it exists in principle but not in fact. Freedom of expression would not truly exist if the right could be exercised only in an area that a benevolent government has provided as a safe haven for crackpots. The Constitution says that Congress (and the States) may not abridge the right to free speech. This provision means what it says. We properly read it to permit reasonable regulation of speech-connected activities in carefully restricted circumstances. But we do not confine the permissible exercise of First Amendment rights to a telephone booth or the four corners of a pamphlet, or to supervised and ordained discussion in a school classroom.
If a regulation were adopted by school officials forbidding discussion of the Vietnam conflict, or the expression by any student of opposition to it anywhere on school property except as part of a prescribed classroom exercise, it would be obvious that the regulation would violate the constitutional rights of students, at least if it could not be justified by a showing that the students' activities would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school. Cf. Hammond [514] v. South Carolina State College, 272 F.Supp. 947 (D. C. S. C. 1967) (orderly protest meeting on state college campus); Dickey v. Alabama State Board of Education, 273 F.Supp. 613 (D. C. M. D. Ala. 1967) (expulsion of student editor of college newspaper). In the circumstances of the present case, the prohibition of the silent, passive "witness of the armbands," as one of the children called it, is no less offensive to the Constitution's guarantees.
As we have discussed, the record does not demonstrate any facts which might reasonably have led school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities, and no disturbances or disorders on the school premises in fact occurred. These petitioners merely went about their ordained rounds in school. Their deviation consisted only in wearing on their sleeve a band of black cloth, not more than two inches wide. They wore it to exhibit their disapproval of the Vietnam hostilities and their advocacy of a truce, to make their views known, and, by their example, to influence others to adopt them. They neither interrupted school activities nor sought to intrude in the school affairs or the lives of others. They caused discussion outside of the classrooms, but no interference with work and no disorder. In the circumstances, our Constitution does not permit officials of the State to deny their form of expression.
We express no opinion as to the form of relief which should be granted, this being a matter for the lower courts to determine. We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Reversed and remanded.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART, concurring.
Although I agree with much of what is said in the Court's opinion, and with its judgment in this case, I [515] cannot share the Court's uncritical assumption that, school discipline aside, the First Amendment rights of children are co-extensive with those of adults. Indeed, I had thought the Court decided otherwise just last Term in Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629. I continue to hold the view I expressed in that case: "[A] State may permissibly determine that, at least in some precisely delineated areas, a child--like someone in a captive audience--is not possessed of that full capacity for individual choice which is the presupposition of First Amendment guarantees." Id., at 649-650 (concurring in result). Cf. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158.
MR. JUSTICE WHITE, concurring.
While I join the Court's opinion, I deem it appropriate to note, first, that the Court continues to recognize a distinction between communicating by words and communicating by acts or conduct which sufficiently impinges on some valid state interest; and, second, that I do not subscribe to everything the Court of Appeals said about free speech in its opinion in Burnside v. Byars, 363 F.2d 744, 748 (C. A. 5th Cir. 1966), a case relied upon by the Court in the matter now before us.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK, dissenting.
The Court's holding in this case ushers in what I deem to be an entirely new era in which the power to control pupils by the elected "officials of state supported public schools . . ." in the United States is in ultimate effect transferred to the Supreme Court. [note 1] The Court brought [516] this particular case here on a petition for certiorari urging that the First and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of school pupils to express their political views all the way "from kindergarten through high school." Here the constitutional right to "political expression" asserted was a right to wear black armbands during school hours and at classes in order to demonstrate to the other students that the petitioners were mourning because of the death of United States soldiers in Vietnam and to protest that war which they were against. Ordered to refrain from wearing the armbands in school by the elected school officials and the teachers vested with state authority to do so, apparently only seven out of the school system's 18,000 pupils deliberately refused to obey the order. One defying pupil was Paul Tinker, 8 years old, who was in the second grade; another, Hope Tinker, was 11 years old and in the fifth grade; a third member of the Tinker family was 13, in the eighth grade; and a fourth member of the same family was John Tinker, 15 years old, an 11th grade high school pupil. Their father, a Methodist minister without a church, is paid a salary by the American Friends Service Committee. Another student who defied the school order and insisted on wearing an armband in school was Christopher Eckhardt, an 11th grade pupil and a petitioner in this case. His mother is an official in the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom.
As I read the Court's opinion it relies upon the following grounds for holding unconstitutional the judgment of the Des Moines school officials and the two courts below. First, the Court concludes that the wearing of armbands is "symbolic speech" which is "akin to 'pure speech'" and therefore protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Secondly, the Court decides that the public schools are an appropriate place to exercise "symbolic speech" as long as normal school functions are not "unreasonably" disrupted. Finally, the Court arrogates to itself, rather than to the State's elected officials charged with running the schools, the decision as to which school disciplinary regulations are "reasonable."
Assuming that the Court is correct in holding that the conduct of wearing armbands for the purpose of conveying political ideas is protected by the First Amendment, cf., e.g., Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co., 336 U.S. 490 (1949), the crucial remaining questions are whether students and teachers may use the schools at their whim as a platform for the exercise of free speech and whether the courts will allocate to themselves the function of deciding how the pupils' school day will be spent. While I have always believed that under the First and Fourteenth Amendments neither the State nor the Federal Government has any authority to regulate or censor the content of speech, I have never believed that any person has a right to give speeches or engage in demonstrations where he pleases and when he pleases. This Court has already rejected such a notion. In Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536, 554 (1965), for example, the Court clearly stated that the rights of free speech and assembly "do not mean that everyone with opinions or beliefs to express may address a group at any public place and at any time."
While the record does not show that any of these armband students shouted, used profane language, or were violent in any manner, detailed testimony by some of them shows their armbands caused comments, warnings by other students, the poking of fun at them, and a warning by an older football player that other, nonprotesting students had better let them alone. There is also evidence that a teacher of mathematics had his lesson period practically "wrecked" chiefly by disputes with Mary Beth Tinker, who wore her armband for her "demonstration." Even a casual reading of the record shows that this armband did divert students' minds from their regular lessons, and that talk, comments, etc., made John Tinker "self-conscious" in attending school with his armband. While the absence of obscene remarks or boisterous and loud disorder perhaps justifies the Court's statement that the few armband students did not actually "disrupt" the classwork, I think the record overwhelmingly shows that the armbands did exactly what the elected school officials and principals foresaw they would, that is, took the students' minds off their classwork and diverted them to thoughts about the highly emotional subject of the Vietnam war. And I repeat that if the time has come when pupils of state-supported schools, kindergartens, grammar schools, or high schools, can defy and flout orders of school officials to keep their minds on their own schoolwork, it is the beginning of a new revolutionary era of permissiveness in this country fostered by the judiciary. The next logical step, it appears to me, would be to hold unconstitutional laws that bar pupils under 21 or 18 from voting, or from being elected members of the boards of education.
The United States District Court refused to hold that the state school order violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 258 F.Supp. 971. Holding that the protest was akin to speech, which is protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments, that court held that the school order was "reasonable" and hence constitutional. There was at one time a line of cases holding "reasonableness" as the court saw it to be the test of a "due process" violation. Two cases upon which the Court today heavily relies for striking down this school order used this test of reasonableness, Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923), and Bartels v. Iowa, 262 U.S. 404 (1923). The opinions in both cases were written by Mr. Justice McReynolds; Mr. Justice Holmes, who opposed this reasonableness test, dissented from the holdings as did Mr. Justice Sutherland. This constitutional test of reasonableness prevailed in this Court for a season. It was this test that brought on President Franklin Roosevelt's well-known Court fight. His proposed legislation did not pass, but the fight left the "reasonableness" constitutional test dead on the battlefield, so much so that this Court in Ferguson v. Skrupa, 372 U.S. 726, 729, 730, after a thorough review of the old cases, was able to conclude in 1963:
"There was a time when the Due Process Clause was used by this Court to strike down laws which were thought unreasonable, that is, unwise or incompatible with some particular economic or social philosophy.
"The doctrine that prevailed in Lochner, Coppage, Adkins, Burns, and like cases--that due process authorizes courts to hold laws unconstitutional when they believe the legislature has acted unwisely--has long since been discarded."
The Ferguson case totally repudiated the old reasonableness-due process test, the doctrine that judges have the power to hold laws unconstitutional upon the belief of judges that they "shock the conscience" or that they are "unreasonable," "arbitrary," "irrational," "contrary to fundamental 'decency,'" or some other such flexible term without precise boundaries. I have many times expressed my opposition to that concept on the ground that it gives judges power to strike down any law they do not like. If the majority of the Court today, by agreeing to the opinion of my Brother FORTAS, is resurrecting that old reasonableness-due process test, I think the constitutional change should be plainly, unequivocally, and forthrightly stated for the benefit of the bench and bar. It will be a sad day for the country, I believe, when the present-day Court returns to the McReynolds due process concept. Other cases cited by the Court do not, as implied, follow the McReynolds reasonableness doctrine. West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, clearly rejecting the "reasonableness" test, held that the Fourteenth Amendment made the First applicable to the States, and that the two forbade a State to compel little schoolchildren to salute the United States flag when they had religious scruples against doing so. Neither Thornhill v. Alabama, 310 U.S. 88; Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359; Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229; nor Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, related to schoolchildren at all, and none of these cases embraced Mr. Justice McReynolds' reasonableness test; and Thornhill, Edwards, and Brown relied on the vagueness of state statutes under scrutiny to hold them unconstitutional. Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536, 555, and Adderley v. Florida, 385 U.S. 39, cited by the Court as a "compare," indicating, I suppose, that these two cases are no longer the law, were not rested to the slightest extent on the Meyer and Bartels "reasonableness-due process-McReynolds" constitutional test.
I deny, therefore, that it has been the "unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years" that "students" and "teachers" take with them into the "schoolhouse gate" constitutional rights to "freedom of speech or expression." Even Meyer did not hold that. It makes no reference to "symbolic speech" at all; what it did was to strike down as "unreasonable" and therefore unconstitutional a Nebraska law barring the teaching of the German language before the children reached the eighth grade. One can well agree with Mr. Justice Holmes and Mr. Justice Sutherland, as I do, that such a law was no more unreasonable than it would be to bar the teaching of Latin and Greek to pupils who have not reached the eighth grade. In fact, I think the majority's reason for invalidating the Nebraska law was that it did not like it or in legal jargon that it "shocked the Court's conscience," "offended its sense of justice," or was "contrary to fundamental concepts of the English-speaking world," as the Court has sometimes said. The truth is that a teacher of kindergarten, grammar school, or high school pupils no more carries into a school with him a complete right to freedom of speech and expression than an anti-Catholic or anti-Semite carries with him a complete freedom of speech and religion into a Catholic church or Jewish synagogue. Nor does a person carry with him into the United States Senate or House, or into the Supreme Court, or any other court, a complete constitutional right to go into those places contrary to their rules and speak his mind on any subject he pleases. It is a myth to say that any person has a constitutional right to say what he pleases, where he pleases, and when he pleases. Our Court has decided precisely the opposite.
In my view, teachers in state-controlled public schools are hired to teach there. Although Mr. Justice McReynolds may have intimated to the contrary in Meyer v. Nebraska, supra, certainly a teacher is not paid to go into school and teach subjects the State does not hire him to teach as a part of its selected curriculum. Nor are public school students sent to the schools at public expense to broadcast political or any other views to educate and inform the public. The original idea of schools, which I do not believe is yet abandoned as worthless or out of date, was that children had not yet reached the point of experience and wisdom which enabled them to teach all of their elders. It may be that the Nation has outworn the old-fashioned slogan that "children are to be seen not heard," but one may, I hope, be permitted to harbor the thought that taxpayers send children to school on the premise that at their age they need to learn, not teach.
The State had there passed a law barring students from peaceably assembling in Greek letter fraternities and providing that students who joined them could be expelled from school. This law would appear on the surface to run afoul of the First Amendment's freedom of assembly clause. The law was attacked as violative of due process and of the privileges and immunities clause and as a deprivation of property and of liberty, under the Fourteenth Amendment. It was argued that the fraternity made its members more moral, taught discipline, and inspired its members to study harder and to obey better the rules of discipline and order. This Court rejected all the "fervid" pleas of the fraternities' advocates and decided unanimously against these Fourteenth Amendment arguments. The Court in its next to the last paragraph made this statement which has complete relevance for us today:
"It is said that the fraternity to which complainant belongs is a moral and of itself a disciplinary force. This need not be denied. But whether such membership makes against discipline was for the State of Mississippi to determine. It is to be remembered that the University was established by the State and is under the control of the State, and the enactment of the statute may have been induced by the opinion that membership in the prohibited societies divided the attention of the students and distracted from that singleness of purpose which the State desired to exist in its public educational institutions. It is not for us to entertain conjectures in opposition to the views of the State and annul its regulations upon disputable considerations of their wisdom or necessity."
It was on the foregoing argument that this Court sustained the power of Mississippi to curtail the First Amendment's right of peaceable assembly. And the same reasons are equally applicable to curtailing in the States' public schools the right to complete freedom of expression. Iowa's public schools, like Mississippi's university, are operated to give students an opportunity to learn, not to talk politics by actual speech, or by "symbolic" speech. And, as I have pointed out before, the record amply shows that public protest in the school classes against the Vietnam war "distracted from that singleness of purpose which the State desired to exist in its public educational institutions." Here the Court should accord Iowa educational institutions the same right to determine for themselves to what extent free expression should be allowed in its schools as it accorded Mississippi with reference to freedom of assembly. But even if the record were silent as to protests against the Vietnam war distracting students from their assigned class work, members of this Court, like all other citizens, know, without being told, that the disputes over the wisdom of the Vietnam war have disrupted and divided this country as few other issues ever have. Of course students, like other people, cannot concentrate on lesser issues when black armbands are being ostentatiously displayed in their presence to call attention to the wounded and dead of the war, some of the wounded and the dead being their friends and neighbors. It was, of course, to distract the attention of other students that some students insisted up to the very point of their own suspension from school that they were determined to sit in school with their symbolic armbands.
Change has been said to be truly the law of life but sometimes the old and the tried and true are worth holding. The schools of this Nation have undoubtedly contributed to giving us tranquility and to making us a more law-abiding people. Uncontrolled and uncontrollable liberty is an enemy to domestic peace. We cannot close our eyes to the fact that some of the country's greatest problems are crimes committed by the youth, too many of school age. School discipline, like parental discipline, is an integral and important part of training our children to be better citizens. Here a very small number of students have crisply and summarily refused to obey a school order designed to give pupils who want to learn the opportunity to do so. One does not need to be a prophet or the son of a prophet to know that after the Court's holding today some students in Iowa schools and indeed in all schools will be ready, able, and willing to defy their teachers on practically all orders. This is the more unfortunate for the schools since groups of students all over the land are already running loose, conducting break-ins, sit-ins, lie-ins, and smash-ins. Many of these student groups, as is all too familiar to all who read the newspapers and watch the television news programs, have already engaged in rioting, property seizures, and destruction. They have picketed schools to force students not to cross their picket lines and have too often violently attacked earnest but frightened students who wanted an education that the pickets did not want them to get. Students engaged in such activities are apparently confident that they know far more about how to operate public school systems than do their parents, teachers, and elected school officials. It is no answer to say that the particular students here have not yet reached such high points in their demands to attend classes in order to exercise their political pressures. Turned loose with lawsuits for damages and injunctions against their teachers as they are here, it is nothing but wishful thinking to imagine that young, immature students will not soon believe it is their right to control the schools rather than the right of the States that collect the taxes to hire the teachers for the benefit of the pupils. This case, therefore, wholly without constitutional reasons in my judgment, subjects all the public schools in the country to the whims and caprices of their loudest-mouthed, but maybe not their brightest, students. I, for one, am not fully persuaded that school pupils are wise enough, even with this Court's expert help from Washington, to run the 23,390 public school systems in our 50 States. I wish, therefore, wholly to disclaim any purpose on my part to hold that the Federal Constitution compels the teachers, parents, and elected school officials to surrender control of the American public school system to public school students. I dissent.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, dissenting.
I certainly agree that state public school authorities in the discharge of their responsibilities are not wholly exempt from the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment respecting the freedoms of expression and association. At the same time I am reluctant to believe that there is any disagreement between the majority and myself on the proposition that school officials should be accorded the widest authority in maintaining discipline and good order in their institutions. To translate that proposition into a workable constitutional rule, I would, in cases like this, cast upon those complaining the burden of showing that a particular school measure was motivated by other than legitimate school concerns--for example, a desire to prohibit the expression of an unpopular point of view, while permitting expression of the dominant opinion.
Finding nothing in this record which impugns the good faith of respondents in promulgating the armband regulation, I would affirm the judgment below.

Friday, December 11, 2009

The Declaration of Independence

On July 4th, 1776 The declaration of Independence was signed. The original Declaration is now exhibited in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom in Washington, DC. It has faded badly, largely because of poor preservation techniques during the 19th century. The document measures 29-3/4 inches by 24-1/2 inches. People who watched the popular movie "National Treasure" want to know. On the back, at the bottom, upside-down is simply written: "Original Declaration of Independence / dated 4th July 1776." Regarding the message on the back, according to the National Archives, "While no one knows for certain who wrote it, it is known that early in its life, the large parchment document was rolled up for storage. So, it is likely that the notation was added simply as a label." There are no hidden messages. The Declaration House Here is where Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration. The house has been reconstructed and is now part of Independence National Historical Park. The Independence Hall Association, host of these web pages, led the efforts to have the Graff House reconstructed in 1975, in time for the Bicentennial. The Declaration of Independence The text and image of the Declaration.
The Signers of the Declaration of Independence This section gives a profile of every delegate who signed the Declaration in 1776. You will find factual information such as birth-death dates, occupation, education, etc. Each signer also has a short story of their life. A good resource for students.
Related Information This section provides a listing of people (George III, Patrick Henry, etc.), Events and Things (Boston Massacre, a Tax Stamp, etc.), and Laws and Resolutions (Sugar Act, Quartering Act, etc.).
Thomas Jefferson's Account of the Declaration Read the lengthy excerpt from Thomas Jefferson's autobiography that talks about the days leading up to the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the history of the document, and various other factors which involved the authoring of the Declaration. LinksThis excellent collection of links provides other online resources about the Declaration of Independence. Such sites include analyses of the style of language in the Declaration, the story of the drafting of the document, and the relationship the Declaration has to other historic documents.
Declaration Timeline A Chronology of Events, June 7, 1776 to January 18, 1777.
Revolutionary War Timeline A Chronology from the French and Indian War to the Constitution
More Information A collection of orations and newspaper clippings

Friday, November 20, 2009

Adding Navigation

This week I have learned a lot about Flash such as only use Actionscript 2.0 not 3.0, Making the scenes was easy, what was hard was that I had to figure out an error on the Flash Program (Error was I was using Actionscript 3.0 not 2.0 so the Navigation didn't work). Duh on me, I guess. I overcame them by doing the Title scene all over again, (In 2.0 that is, mind you.) I swear if that happens again I'll FREAK!!!!! I've learned a lot about Civics this year such as the 27 amendments. I'm just wondering why my Navigation screen still won't work. I might still need a little more time.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

The Sandy River Gazette Start-Up

There is now a new Gazette going around the school made by Matthew and I if anyone has anything that we might put into the Gazette for the week of the 15th please see me or Matthew.

Monday, November 9, 2009

Swine Flu Panademic

Above is a video of the Swine Flu. The Swine Flu season 2009-2010 is almost over but some of us are still feeling the effects of the Flu and H1N1. The symptoms of the Swine Flu are just like regular flu but more deadly. If you have Aches, Fever, Chills, Sore of Scratchy Throat, Cough, Runny of Congested Nose, Fatigue, Diarrhea or Vomiting then stay home, drink liquids, take medicine, and get plenty of rest.

Friday, October 30, 2009

Working With a Paper Prototype and Flash

Well since The Spikers (Mine and Garrett's Team) are finished with our paper prototype.
Also now the Spikers are working on Flash with the title screen which is finished and you can view it on our Team Page. http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/index:php/Team:The_Spikers you can also see tthe video here.

Friday, October 16, 2009

The Spikers Game

1.Our game Topic relates to civics by teaching about the first ten amendments. At one part of the game you see a screen where you can practice songs that are too hard, but before you can practice there's a scene you have to watch where your character gets in a fight with the police. The scene goes like this, the police are in the hotel where you are staying and the police find the guitar you stole. The police say, "We thought he stole a guitar." Then a button shows up that says "Open the Door." Click on the button and your character opens the door. Your character says, "WHAT ARE YOU DOING!" Then the police say, "We're arresting you for stealing a guitar!"

2. They will learn more by playing because the more they play the more amendments they get, and there's a screen where they can see all the amendments they have collected.

3.Our game fits into the Ideas Framework by talking about the amendment and Rights, the game talks about citizenship by having your character get arrested by stealing a guitar which should teach kids never to steal. Link to Team Page: http://www.myglife.org/usa/wv/srmswiki/index.php/Team:The_Spikers

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

About the Game

If I'm correct I'd say that The Spikers game should be really fun and challenging for all ages something like Guitar Hero, DDR and Rock Band related. There are three levels to choose from Normal, Hard and Expert. The game is about the 27 amendments. There will be Amendment Points in the game, with enough Amendment Points you can buy Point Modifyers, Outfits, Guitars, Band Members, New Characters, and Amps.
I want to try to teach kids about the amendments while playing a game. Garrett will be the researcher, action script maker and game assembler and I will be the music expert, artistian and group manager.

Friday, October 2, 2009

Why I Picked my two blogs

I picked the First Amendment Religion Clauses because it talks about the first amendment which I really want to know more about.
I pick prescriptions because it talks about all the amendments plus all the new ones coming out.

Monday, September 28, 2009

Globaloria

In Globaloria I'm doing very well, I find that Flash, Wiki, and Blogger are very interesting because I never would have made a blog, or a game, or even a wiki if I hadn't of got in Globaloria. I've learned how to work with Flash and work on making a game. I've played games and reviewed two of them, and picked civics as our game project. I played Katrina Tempest in Cresent City and Super Toaster! and reviewed them both they were very fun games but I believe that Super Toaster! was a better game than Katrina Tempest in Cresent City. I have a link and here it is http://www.docstoc.com/docs/1484129/All-27-Amendments. My experience in Flash is pretty good, and I hope to make a very good game to share with all the Globaloria world. I hope to be both the sound expert and the game constructer, because I have music I was wanting to put on the game and I'm pretty good at putting stuff together.

Monday, September 21, 2009

Internet Safety

With the stuff going on in the world today people might think the Internet is dangerous but it is only as dangerous as you make it. If you go to http://www.wvcybersafety.com/ you can learn more about cyber safety. If you aren't careful you might get a virus, Identity theft, of even memory loss on your computer. Also, be careful what you download, if you download public games such as World of Warcraft, Wizard 101, Byond, or even Club Penguin you might get your memory stolen. Plus be careful what websites you get on, if you get on websites such as Myspace, Facebook, Twitter, Addicting Games, Smashin Games, Y8, A123, Playlist, Limewire and such websites just like that you could get a virus. Internet Safety is a big thing today so please if you get on websites that I named here please be careful. Here is a funny skit for you to watch about cyber safety. http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/273062/Hazmat_Skit.wmv Here is a more serious one. http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/273062/Cabell_Promo_with_logo.wmv