Argument Against Avalos

Brave Sandra Ybarra exposing the mismanaging of HUD. The young lady savvy, style, and simple tells the truth. We are grateful for Sandra, Scott, and never mind the Common Council who have sunk low. A warm note to Scott about Sariah Law which resembles hard core democrat socialist. I observed the protest and noticed people who have been dumb down and domesticated would easily conform to Sariah Law under the correct environment and leaders.

This policy effects the social equity of the city by making sure that all residential streets are uniform in speed limit. The policy also effects the parking areas that are regulated by fines with no park

This campaign does not start with civil disobedience, rather it begins with collecting facts. These facts could be how the law came to be, the context of the law, who wrote it and why. These facts prove the injustice of a law. Then negotiation of the law takes place, in hope one can avoid breaking the law. If and when negotiations fail, the third step is self-purification.

The United States of America would be a different place without civil disobedience. Breaking the rules is usually considered wrong; however, sometimes there are exemptions to these rules, to fight for a good cause. Much of history was made through civil disobedience. Without it, we would still have slavery. We would have an overpowering government.

No person wants to tread the difficult trail when it would be much easier to follow the herd along the easy route of following laws. Yet, those who still hold passion for moral truths disobey the law when unjust, and this is a true testament to the power of American perseverance. Most recently, the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline have brought more attention to the pipeline. This is another strong effect of civil disobedience. Even when no legal change is brought about immediately, attention to the cause still promotes change for the future.

Pedestrians are menaced every minute of the days and nights by a wanton recklessness of

Most people know it's illegal but ask yourself why care about it if there's no signs saying not to ride in this area or it's illegal to ride on these streets? To me this mean we don't allow it, but really don't take it serious is what I would say. If it was something they wanted to enforce they show make it noticeable to the public. Also make it clear that it's illegal and serious matters would be taking to ashore that it is stop or at least

With just the simple crumbly and overgrown sidewalks to no one in a police car, these can really change people’s outlooks on

Civil Disobedience Thousands of dedicated people march the streets of a huge city, chanting repetitively about needing a change. They proudly hold vibrant signs and banners as they fight for what they believe in. Expressions of determination and hope are visibly spread across their faces. These people aren’t using weapons or violence to fight for their ideas; simply, they are using civil disobedience.

Protests such as these are due to the displacement of lower income individuals from their homes after their rent was raised due to the increasing property values. In fact, a UC-Berkeley study and map shows that evictions and rent increases often directly coincide with areas that the Google buses stop. Moreover, the median rent in San Francisco has increased to over 3000 dollars a month, 10 percent more than the previous year and three times the national average. Ironically, San Francisco boasts the nation’s largest minimum age at over 10 dollars an hour; though even this is not enough to make an impact on the increasing cost of living in the area due to the tech boom. Property inside the city has been bought and remodeled to suit the liking and taste of the tech employees that are now seeking to call the city home.

Other cities, such as Honolulu is doing that. They’re doing what it is the best for the safety of children, elderly, and adults, by making a law against distracted walking. I think, there should be a law against distracted walking. Let’s say you were walking, while looking on FaceBook or something, and not at all paying attention. You get hit by a stupid driver that didn’t see you.

They believe that their is technology available that help people cross the street safely while they are on their phones. However, scientist have studied the brain and concluded that humans can not focus on phones and surroundings at the same time. According to the article,“Would You Ban Texting and Walking?” “people who text and walk are 4 time more likely to do something more dangerous--such as crossing the street without looking.” While it is common sense to be careful while the crossing the street, it is obvious that many deaths and injuries have resulted because we need a

In 2013, 4,668 motorcyclists were killed and 88,000 more were injured on our nation’s roads. The NHTSA estimates that helmets saved 1,630 lives of motorcyclists in 2013. They also say that 715 lives in all states could have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets. But opposers of these laws debate that this should be up to the state to decide and the government shouldn’t interfere. I believe that helmet laws should be issued because they save lives and reduce fatalities.

We cannot put effort into a cause if we are the problem. Secondly, the picture has a sign posted at the end of the traveling line. Illegal

Everyday a pedestrian is killed because they put their phone before their own lives. There have even been people who have died just from not paying any attention to the roads and being on their phones. The fact that pedestrians can’t put their phone down and get hit by a car may sound absurd, but something momentous needs to be down with this madness. Distracted walking should be illegal because it leads to many deaths, economic have to pay for the accidents, and with the distracting walking being a law can change some people’s behavior. First off, people have died because they put their phone before their life.