Texas prisons and Texans are in conflict over why should criminals deserve to get H1N1 shots before the citizens of Texas. The article by: Mike Ward, states that the shots will go to "those most at risk". I think those who really need it should get the shot, criminal or not. You got pregnant women in prisons and hundreds maybe thousands of people who visit the prisoners on a day to day basis. The Texas prison system is the second largest in the U.S. and has more than 150,000 convicts, why let all these people die over the neglect of a shot? If we allow them to become easily infected, doesn't that make us criminals too? We have a chance to decrease the spreading the spreading of the H1N1 virus, i mean come on, yes they have committed crimes and have done wrong in the past, but what if some aren't guilty or about to finish their jail sentence? These are all questions we should ask ourselves before we start to act selfish. To be honest we can get a shot at a clinic any time we want to, some of us are just to lazy to go and get one. Convicts are there for years and some for life, never able to go anywhere outside the barb wired fence that separates them from us. If the 203,000 vaccinations arrive to the prisons as requested, the officials will distribute the shots to the "offender's medical status- not the custody level." I really dont know how to contain a virus, but the way the prisoner officials wanting to reduce the spreading, sounds like a good start to contain the virus.
We may not care much for the prisoners or the sentence they are serving for the crime they committed, but we should because our neighbor, co-worker, or the guy at the fast food place taking our order can have a realtive or friend in jail that might have come in contact with the H1N1 virus. In other words, you don't have to step a foot in a prison to get the virus, but if there's one less person contaminated, it's better for the health of the guards and the Texas citizens.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I am commenting on Hector's editorial on the prisoners of the Texas prisons getting the vaccination for the H1N1 virus. I agree with Hector on everyone, even prisoners, should get the vaccination for the H1N1 virus. Everyone is capable of getting the virus, even though they are in prisons, the guards are able to bring it to them from the outside. When the virus is brought in from the outside, you are risking the chance of infecting the whole prison and everyone in it. Just because they are convicts too, it doesn't mean that they are no longer people. They are people just like you and me. The state should vaccinate the prisons across Texas and prevent what could be over 200,000 deaths. The prisoners are confined to small areas and are able to infect more people since they are so close. I also agree with Hector about vaccinating the prisoners who are about to get out and those who are close to getting out from their prison sentences. They are getting out and ready to live their lives, without trying to catch the virus. They are newly exposed to the virus since they have been living in a tiny cell for years. It is the right thing to do, vaccinating the prisoners, they are people too and deserve to be given the shot just like everyone else in the free world. With the vaccination going to everyone in the state, it will make it less likely for others to get it.
Monday, November 16, 2009
The article that hector wrote about convicts getting H1N1 shots brought up some good points, but on the whole I disagree with the article.
Firstly, pregnant women need the vaccination, period. If they happen to be incarcerated makes no difference, but to say that all convicts get preference because there are many pregnant women inmates would be wrong. The elderly, pregnant women, and children need the vaccine first without a doubt.
Another point I discovered was hinted at, but never reached it's destination. Convicts cannot just go out and receive the shot if they so choose. Yes I feel this is a valid point. But if that was to justify giving preferential allotments to inmates it would prevent citizens who have chosen to respectfully regard the laws from doing the same. If there is such a limited amount to be given you cannot prevent an un-incarcirated individual from receiving the shot by giving it to someone who is in jail. You just don't punish the innocent for the gain of the guilty.
Which brings another point to mind. I do believe it is unsafe for prison guards and prisoners who will be released to not be vaccinated, of course. Thus reducing the risk for people associated with the prison system as well as the rest of society who comes in contact with them.
Basically, I understand the view of the article but couldn't disagree more, respectfully. The statements made do ask a good question but do not find the right answer. Prisoners should not be denied the shot all together . But rather receive rationing for the average number of at risk individuals, those that work in the prison system and those being released. But if a healthy rapist gets the sot before a 6 month pregnant women who still hasn't received hers, tat would be wholy unjustified, unsafe, and unconscious of the rights and privileges that morality and law abiding earns you.
(http://shawnspolitricks.blogspot.com/2009/11/classmate-critique-is-h1n1-4-u.html)
A classmate’s blog entry composed on November 2nd focuses in on the current debate over whether or not the vaccination of law-abiding citizens takes precedence over that of imprisoned criminals.
He links to a news article on statesman.com which covers this issue. When writing any referential informative piece, there is a thin line between quoting from selections that back up your side and fragmenting quotations in an attempt to validate your own opinion. As my classmate mentions around the middle of his post, “I really dont know how to contain a virus, but the way the prisoner officials wanting to reduce the spreading, sounds like a good start to contain the virus.”
I will be examining my classmate’s logic oriented statements, while keeping my personal feelings and opinions out of the mix. I welcome anyone who questions or disagrees with my logic and reasoning to comment.
An official count by state of those with H1N1 featured on northshorejournal.org reports that the entire state of Texas has a CDC count of 1,670 and a total count of 1,811. My source is credible, as can be confirmed by reading its resume page. As for its accuracy anddependability, there are weekly updates. My classmate is correct in stating that there are over 150,000 housed convicts in Texas alone. However, when this point is brought up in his post, an inaccurate connection is made: “The Texas prison system is the second largest in the U.S. and has more than 150,000 convicts, why let all these people die over the neglect of a shot?” If there are only 1,811 cases of H1N1 throughout Texas (both incarcerated and not) how are we letting “…all these people die over the neglect of a shot”? According to Merriam-webster.com, a vaccine “…is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease”. Put simply, a vaccine only increases defense; it is not a cure.
Before continuing on to my next point, I will post its respective target paragraph below:
“We may not care much for the prisoners or the sentence they are serving for the crime they committed, but we should because our neighbor, co-worker, or the guy at the fast food place taking our order can have a realtive or friend in jail that might have come in contact with the H1N1 virus. In other words, you don't have to step a foot in a prison to get the virus, but if there's one less person contaminated, it's better for the health of the guards and the Texas citizens.”
My classmate’s highest card rests in this final paragraph. By disarming those who have little to no sympathy for the guilty but hold the innocent high, he successfully presents a clear-cut case.
Post a Comment