President Barack Obama and Gun Rights

President Barack Obama and Gun Rights In the run-up to the 2008 presidential election, many gun owners worried about the consequences of victory for Democrat candidate Barack Obama. Given Obama’s record as an Illinois state senator, where he stated his support for an all-out ban on handguns, among other gun control stances, pro-gun advocates were concerned that gun rights might suffer under an Obama presidential administration.   National Rifle Association Executive Director Wayne LaPierre  said prior to the 2008 election that â€Å"never in NRAs history have we faced a presidential candidate - and hundreds of candidates running for other offices - with such a deep-rooted hatred of firearm freedoms.†Ã‚   After Obama’s election, gun sales reached a record pace as gun owners snatched up guns, particularly those that had been branded assault weapons under the defunct 1994 assault weapons ban, out of an apparent fear that Obama would crack down on gun ownership. The Obama presidency, however, had limited impact gun rights. Obama’s Gun Record as State Lawmaker When Obama was running for the Illinois state senate in 1996, the Independent Voters of Illinois, a Chicago-based non-profit, issued a questionnaire asking if candidates supported legislation to â€Å"ban the manufacture, sale, and possession of handguns,† to â€Å"ban assault weapons† and to instate â€Å"mandatory waiting periods and background checks† for gun purchases. Obama answered yes on all three accounts. When that survey came to light during his run for the White House in 2008, Obama’s campaign said that a staffer had filled out the survey and that some of the answers did not represent Obama’s views, â€Å"then or now.† Obama also cosponsored legislation to limit handgun purchases to one per month. He also voted against letting people violate local weapons bans in cases of self-defense and stated his support for the District of Columbia’s handgun ban that was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008. He also called it a â€Å"scandal† that President George W. Bush did not authorize a renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban. During the 2008 campaign, Obama said that he had â€Å"no intention of taking away folks’ guns,† but added that he would support â€Å"reasonable, thoughtful gun control measures† that respected the Second Amendment while also â€Å"cracking down on the various loopholes that exist.† He expressed his intent, as president, to make sure law enforcement was given access to information that would allow them to trace guns used in crimes back to â€Å"unscrupulous gun dealers.† Obama and Assault Weapons Just weeks after Obama’s inauguration in January 2009, attorney general Eric Holder announced at a press conference that the Obama administration would be seeking a renewal of the expired ban on assault weapons. â€Å"As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons,† Holder said. To gun owners wary of increased pressure on gun rights, the announcement seemed to serve as validation of their pre-election fears. But the Obama administration dismissed Holder’s statements. When asked about a renewal of the assault weapon ban, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said: â€Å"the president believes there are other strategies we can take to enforce the laws that are already on the books.† U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-New York, introduced legislation to renew the ban. However, the legislation did not receive an endorsement from Obama.   Ã¢â‚¬ËœCommon Sense’ Gun Control   In the aftermath of a mass shooting in Tucson, Ariz., that wounded U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Obama renewed his push for â€Å"common sense† measures to tighten gun regulations and close the so-called gun show loophole.   While not specifically calling for new gun control measures, Obama recommended strengthening the National Instant Background Check system in place for gun purchases and rewarding states supplying the best data that would keep guns out of the hands of those the system is meant to weed out. Later, Obama directed the Department of Justice to begin talks about gun control, involving â€Å"all stakeholders† in the issue. The National Rifle Association declined an invitation to join the talks, with LaPierre saying there is little use in sitting down with people who have â€Å"dedicated their lives† to reducing gun rights. As the summer of 2011 ended, however, those talks had not led to recommendations by the Obama administration for new or tougher gun laws. Strengthened Gun Reporting on the Border One of the Obama administration’s few actions on the subject of guns has been to strengthen a 1975 law that requires gun dealers to report the sale of multiple handguns to the same buyer. The heightened regulation, which took effect in August 2011, requires gun dealers in the border states of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas to report the sale of multiple assault-style rifles, such as AK-47s and AR-15s.   The NRA filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to block the new regulation from taking effect, calling it a move by the administration to â€Å"pursue their gun control agenda.† Summary of Gun Rights During Obama’s First Term The story through much of his first term in office was a neutral one. Congress did not take up serious consideration of new gun control laws, nor did Obama ask them to. When Republicans regained control of the House of Representatives in the 2010 midterm, chances of far-reaching gun control laws being enacted were essentially squashed. Instead, Obama urged local, state, and federal authorities to stringently enforce existing gun control laws. In fact, the only two major gun-related laws enacted during the Obama administration’s first term actually expand the rights of gun owners. The first of these laws, which took effect in February 2012, allows people to openly carry legally owned guns in national parks. The law replaced a Ronald Reagan era policy that required guns to remain locked in glove compartments or trunks of private vehicles that enter national parks. In addressing this law, Obama surprised his pro-gun right critics when he wrote, â€Å"In this country, we have a strong tradition of gun ownership thats handed from generation to generation. Hunting and shooting are part of our national heritage. And, in fact, my administration has not curtailed the rights of gun owners - it has expanded them, including allowing people to carry their guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.† The other law allows Amtrak passengers to carry guns in checked baggage; a reversal of a measure put in place by President George W. Bush in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Obama’s two nominations to the U.S. Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan were considered likely to rule against gun owners on issues involving the Second Amendment. However, the appointees did not shift the balance of power on the court. The new justices replaced David H. Souter and John Paul Stevens, two justices who had consistently voted against an expansion of gun rights, including the monumental Heller decision in 2008 and McDonald decision in 2010. Earlier in his first term, Obama had expressed his express support for the Second Amendment. â€Å"If you’ve got a rifle, you’ve got a shotgun, you’ve got a gun in your house, I’m not taking it away. Alright?† he said. Gun Rights During Obama’s Second Term On January 16, 2013 - just two months after 26 people were killed in a mass shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut - President Obama kicked off his second term by promising an â€Å"overhaul† of gun laws to end what he called the nation’s â€Å"epidemic† of gun violence However, the legislation to overhaul gun control failed on April 17, 2013, when the Republican-controlled Senate rejected a measure banning assault-style weapons and expanding gun-buyer background checks. In January 2016, President Obama began his final year in office by going around the gridlocked Congress by issuing a set of executive orders intended to reduce gun violence. According to a White House Fact Sheet, the measures aimed to improve background checks on gun buyers, increase community safety, provide additional federal funding for mental health treatment, and advance the development of â€Å"smart gun† technology. Obama’s Gun Rights Legacy During his eight years in office, President Barack Obama had to deal with more mass shootings than any of his predecessors, speaking to the nation on the subject of gun violence at least 14 times. In each address, Obama offered sympathy for the loved ones of the deceased victims and repeated his frustration with the Republican-controlled Congress to pass stronger gun control legislation. After each address, gun sales soared. In the end, however, Obama made little progress in advancing his â€Å"common-sense gun laws† at the federal government level - a fact he would later call one of the biggest regrets of his time as president. In 2015, Obama told the BBC that his inability to pass gun laws had been â€Å"the one area where I feel that Ive been most frustrated and most stymied. Updated by Robert Longley

7 Back to School Tips for Teachers

7 Back to School Tips for Teachers Going back to school after the summer break can be exciting, nerve-racking, and hectic for teachers. The summertime is a time for refreshment and renewal. That is important as the beginning of the school year is the most critical time of the year and it can also be the most stressful. Even during the time off, most teachers are looking for ways to improve their class for the upcoming year. Going back to school gives teachers a chance to make small adjustments or significant changes depending on where they are at in their careers. Most veteran teachers have a pretty decent idea of what they need to do to get ready for the new school year. They typically plan to make a few minor tweaks to their overall approach. Younger teachers may totally revamp their approach to how they teach based on their small sample of experience. First-year teachers often come in excited and with no real idea of what it takes to teach. They have ideas that they think will work only to realize quickly that the application of those ideas is much more difficult than the theory of them. No matter where a teacher is in their career, here are some tips that will help them transition back to school quickly and effectively. Reflect on the Past Experience is the ultimate learning tool. First-year teachers will only have their limited experience as a student teacher on which they can rely. Unfortunately, this small sample does not provide them with much information. Veteran teachers will tell you that you learn more in the first few weeks as a teacher than you did during your entire time in a teacher education program. For teachers with at least one year of experience, reflecting on the past can be a valuable tool. Great teachers are constantly looking for new ideas and methods to apply to their classroom. You should never be afraid to try a new approach, but understand that sometimes it works, sometimes it needs tweaking, and sometimes it will need to be thrown out altogether. Teachers must rely on their experiences when it comes to all aspects of their classroom. A teacher must allow experiences, both good and bad, to guide their overall approach to teaching. It Is a New Year Never come into a school year or classroom with preconceived notions. Every student who walks into your classroom deserves the chance to come in with a clean slate. Teachers may pass along pertinent educational information such as standardized test scores to the next teacher, but they should never pass along information about how a particular student or class behaves. Every class and every student is unique, and a different teacher may get other behavior. A teacher who has preconceived notions can be detrimental to the overall development of a particular student or a group of students. Teachers should want to make judgments about a student or a group of students based on their own unique experiences with them and not those from another teacher. Sometimes a teacher can have a personality conflict with a particular student or class and you never want that to cloud how the next teacher handles their class. Set Goals Every teacher should have a set of expectations or goals that they want their students to reach. Teachers should also have a list of personal goals to improve in specific areas of weakness that they have. Having goals of any kind will give you something to work towards. It is also okay to set goals together with your students. Having a shared set of goals will push both teacher and students to work harder to obtain those goals. It is okay that goals be adjusted either way as the year moves along. Sometimes your goals may be too easy for a particular student or class and sometimes they may be too difficult. It is essential that you set high goals and expectations for all your students. Just remember that every student has their own unique needs. The goals you set for one student, may not be applicable for another. Be Prepared Being prepared is the most important aspect of teaching. Teaching is not an 8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. job as many people outside the realm of teaching may  think. It takes a lot of extra time and preparation to do your job effectively. The first day of school for students should never be a teacher’s first day. It takes a lot of time to get ready for school to start. There is a lot of work that needs to be done with both your classroom and your instructional material. A smooth year begins with preparation. A teacher who waits until the last moment to get everything ready is setting themselves up for a rough year. Young teachers need more preparation time than veteran teachers, but even veteran teachers must spend quite a bit of time preparing for the upcoming school year if they plan to have a fantastic year. Set the Tone The first few days and weeks of school will often set the tone for the entire school year. Respect is often won or lost in those first few days and weeks. A teacher should seize that opportunity to establish a solid rapport with their students, but at the same time respectively show them who is in charge. A teacher who comes in with the mindset that they want every student to like them will lose respect quickly, and it will be a difficult year. It is virtually impossible to gain a classes respect as an authoritarian back once you have lost it. Use those first few days and weeks to drill components such as procedures, expectations, and goals. Start out hard as the classroom disciplinarian and then you can ease off as you move throughout the year. Education is a marathon and not a sprint. Do not think that you cannot spend the time to set the tone for the school year. Make these things a priority early and your students will learn more in the long run. Make Contact Getting parents to trust that you have their child’s best interest in mind is paramount. Make extra efforts to contact parents several times within the first few weeks of school. In addition to classroom notes or newsletters, try to contact each parent personally early on by setting up parent meetings, calling them on the phone, emailing them, conducting a home visit, or inviting them up for an open room night. Establishing trustworthy relationships with parents early on when things are going good will make it easier should you begin to have issues. Parents can be your biggest ally, and they can be your biggest enemy. Investing the time and effort early on to win them to your side will make you more effective. Plan Ahead All teachers should plan ahead. It is not easy, but planning does become easier as experience is gained. For example, a teacher can save lots of time by keeping lesson plans from the previous year so that they can use them for the upcoming year. Instead of redeveloping their lesson plans, they make adjustments to them as needed. Teachers can also make copies for several weeks or months of work before school begins. Planning events such as fundraisers and field trips before school starts will save time later. Planning ahead will be beneficial if an emergency occurs and you have to be gone for an extended period of time. Planning also tends to make the overall course of the school year go smoother.

Book review of Night by Elie Wiesel Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Book review of Night by Elie Wiesel - Essay Example Elie later found out later that both his mother and sister were killed at the camp they were transported to. Elie and his father were sent to Auschwitz, a work camp, then from Auschwitz to Buna, and on to Buchenwald. While he and his father were in the concentration camp in Buchenwald, shortly before the war was over and the prisoners released. Elie’s father passed away from dysentery. There were many times when the young boy could think of no reason to survive the agony and pain of his life, yet his father’s memory and words kept him going. At a young age he was made to deal first with the death of his family, secondly with the death of his own childish innocence, and thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, he was made to deal with the temporary death of the God he had always known and believed deeply in. His father begged him many times not to lose the faith of his religion as it would keep him strong, yet in the midst of his pain the young Elie wondered how there could be a God that allowed so much suffering. He started to doubt his own faith, and wonder just where God was, and why he could not hear the cries of the masses of tortured people. Elie begins his story by describing the ghetto where he and his family, along with many others from their community were held captives. Even at this juncture, after having been dragged from their homes and herded like cattle into an area surrounded by barbed wire, somehow these Jewish people were still hopeful for their futures, still believed their lives would be normal again one day soon. Elie notes that â€Å"Most people thought that we would remain in the ghetto until the end of the war, until the arrival of the Red Army. Afterward, everything would be as before. The ghetto was ruled by neither German nor Jew; it was ruled by delusion.† (Wiesel 12). These delusions appeared to be all-consuming; perhaps the alternative of thinking what might be about to happen to themselves,

Understanding the Nature of Groups and Teams Essay

Understanding the Nature of Groups and Teams - Essay Example In most cases, individuals form groups, which later become a team. According to psychoanalytical object-relations theory (Sher, 2004), individuals, groups, and teams are not independent entities but rather are constructs that bond organizational expectations to human feelings and beliefs. Groups and teams rely on a matrix style of management (Gilley & Kerno Jr., 2010), are influenced by the existing organizational authority, and participants show commitment because of the expectations demanded by their organizations. The distinction between groups and teams is that while groups demand a lot of control, planning, and direction in its leadership, are guided by a series of well established goals and objectives, reward members depending on performance (Seat & Sundstrom, 2004), and used when executing specific functional tasks in an organization, teams demand collaborative relationships among members, are guided by a mission in fulfilling their mandate (Offermann, 2006), and can exist in or outside an organization. Therefore, teams are groups with a higher purpose in achieving goals because of creativity, mutual sharing of benefits, attributes, small member size mostly between 5-12 people, and a shared purpose. A group or team is always formed in handling different problems in an organization. Therefore, the management must be keen when determining which one to use for effective task execution and complimentary results. It is best to use groups in instances where tasks are easy, especially when results are expected within a specific timeframe in order to measure the expertise of each member on service delivery, and only if there is a well defined a guiding purpose. However, whenever the management deems there is complexity in task execution, which demands collaborative interactions, availability of enough and reliable resources, teams are given a priority (Gilley & Kerno Jr., 2010). In most occasions, organizations rely on teams

Marketing Communication Assignment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Marketing Communication Assignment - Essay Example Suddenly, the window falls right on his head and he discovers that the cable holding the window up had been cut. The wife and husband meet up in the hallway, trading fake pleasantries and smiles. The morning continues with more craziness as the couple continues to do harm to each other whilst completing their morning chores before heading off to work. The wife gets hit on the head with a strategically placed bowling ball. The husband sets fire to his hair and then takes a bad tumble down the stairs. Eventually, the husband ends up driving away leaving the wife in the house just as a large explosion is caused by the well placed metallic pan in the microwave in tandem with the open gas from the stoves. Pepsi's "Pepsi Grip" commercial begins with a horizon shot of a busy metropolitan city on a hot day, then focuses on a high-rise construction worker taking a sip out of a Pepsi bottle. A whistle from another worker gets the bottle passed along by drops, swings, throws and tosses in a daring way. Suddenly, someone misses a catch, and the Pepsi begins its freefall. A few stories below, a capable worker puts himself on the line by jumping off the scaffolding, hanging by his hands and caught the Pepsi with his feet. The ad ends with "New Pepsi Grip. Easy To Hold." Dial's "Happy Dog" ad starts off with a face shot of a

Assessment of Military Influence in the Middle East

Assessment of Military Influence in the Middle East Q5. What best explains the diminished role of the military in the dispensation of power across the Middle East? Jibin Mathew George The military has been fundamental to the existence and sustenance of the modern Middle East since its inception as a largely colonial police force in the early 20th century. And it is the relative omnipresence and longevity of the military in the Middle East that has gradually evolved it to be seen as a symbol of stability in a troubled region. The question put forth however begets the question of the range of power and influence the military enjoyed in the past few decades. It is therefore necessary to assess the military influence in the Middle East, declining or otherwise through the lens of existing literature that seeks to explain civil-military relations. Consider Samuel Huntingtons hypothesis in The Soldier and the State; Here, Huntington argues that a measure of objective control within the state, one where the military structure recognizes the political and foreign paramountcy of the civilian government and where the civilian government recognizes the militarys professional competence and autonomy is one which is more likely to have a subservient military to a dominant civilian state, and is therefore the most effective measure against the prevalence of coups. On the other hand, Janowitz in his book The Professional Soldier argues that separation of powers as Huntington proposes would instead invite coups, and is better prepared against coups by a constant, mutual interaction between the military and civilian government, facilitating the civilian oversight of the States military arm. Both Huntingtons and Janowitzs arguments for civilian control over the military are essentially arguments for what some scholars say was coup-proofing against anarchy and errant branches of the military. Here, coup-proofing suggested steps such as tokens of special loyalties, compartmentalization, rotation and the institution of the commissar system and a dedicated internal intelligence service to keep a check on the militarys political power and influence within the state. However, it has also been argued that coup-proofing has inadvertently led to the ascendance of domestic state with a highly politicized, and yet very ineffectual military capability. In other words, the dissociation of trust between the civilian structure and the military by way of coup-proofing has evolved the military into one devoid of military capability. Such evidence was evident as far back as the onset of the 1st Gulf War when highly modernized Arab forces were beaten on the field by the well-organized Iraqi Army. It must be noted however that Huntingtons and Janowitzs case for explaining civil-military relations was largely borne out of western construct and experience and were largely myopic, with respect to the fact that they incorrectly viewed a coup as the sole and final exercise of military power. Huntington and Janowitz did not calculate and hypothesize that officers in barracks may be as influential and powerful as officers in the government, that officers may rather be kingmakers than kings. It is in light of such coup-less exercision of power by the military that the question of its declining influence in the Middle East be addressed, especially considering that military coups have often been considered to be a measure of military influence in a state. Therefore, considering the fact that the number of coups have steadily fallen in the Middle East since the 1970s (With countries like Syria having a turbulent and frequent history of coups not having had one since 1970), it is understandable to conclude that the militarys influence in steadily waning. However, that may not be a perfect assumption. Here, it is important to consider the case of three Middle Eastern States; Turkey, Israel and Egypt. Israel for one, may be argued is a warfare state, a nation-state born out of conflict, with a society where the preparation of conflict permeates all levels of economy, society and culture. And it is this very nature of society that has contributed to the relative permanence of the military in Israeli politics. Israel is a true democracy but, it is one where the significance of the military has allowed it significant precedence in Israeli society. The military is largely overseen by the civilian structure but, their relationship is one of co-dependence and partnership rather than one of paramountcy as Huntington argued. This relationship is owing to a lot of factors not limited to the openness of entry from the military to the political field (Moshe Dayan, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon), the very active lobby of ex-military officers within the business and industrial rank and the relative autonomy the IDF enjoys in terms of recruitment, education, training and technological procurement. A lso, the existing civilian-military structure in Israel is a perfect illustration of Janowitzs civilianized military in action, albeit one where the military still enjoys immense influence, that may go as far as political autonomy (In the occupied areas of West Bank and Gaza) as well as a lack of fear from long-term repercussions (Kahan Commission report). On the other hand, the evidence in Turkey is of a military which has been increasingly confident of its duty to preserve the Kemalist Turkish state. It has been a powerful and cohesive institution that has often absorbed tutelary powers by way of coups in 1960, 1971, 1980 and 1977 against democratically elected governments which it didnt believe was preserving the Turkish state. And contrary to popular convention, the army in Turkey preferred to remain kingmakers rather than kings, which is why coups were usually followed by exit guarantees for military officers and a larger role for the military in Turkish domestic and foreign politics (National Security Council after the 1961 constitution following the 60 coup). Presently however, under the more assertive Erdogan, relations have been strained and the military, especially since the 2016 coup attempt has been increasingly devoid of any significant power and influence. It is that rare state in the Middle East where a democratically el ected leader is leading the State away from a partial democracy to a more authoritarian regime. Egypt on the other hand, is a case of a Praetorian state where the lines of distinction are often blurred. It is a state where the military not only did and still does wield a lot of influence and power, but is in charge of a military industrial complex that permeates the all socio-economic levels of the society.   In Egypt, the pattern of increasing arms production and procurement by the military and the expansion of military enterprises into the civilian economy, so much so that 40% of the production capacity is owned by the military, is reflective of the significance of the military in Egypt. Much is the same in Jordan, where its armed forces have entered into joint venture partnerships with 26 foreign defense contractors. However, the cases of Israel, Egypt and Turkey are anomalies in the larger Middle East. In nation-states like Saudi Arabia, power remains solely with the dynastical-clerical network while the military constituted by foreign-trained, apolitical officers and the division of labor allows no real power to the military. Iran remains a theocracy, where power remains removed far from the military, an incidence ensured by the Commissar system which ensures fidelity of the armed forces to the Republic by the Revolutionary Guard. In countries such as Iraq and Yemen, the regular armed forces are splintered into rival factions on primordial and tribal lines. In Syria, similar to Egypt, the institutionalization of the militarys economic interests within the State has ensured the survivability of the regime. There is no single factor responsible for the diminishing role of the military across the Middle East. In fact, it can be argued that the military remains a powerful force in countries such as Egypt and Israel, arguably the most powerful states in the region. However, any power or influence it may have is no longer exercised as it once used to be. Coups have a been a thing of the past for the last few years (Yemen and Egypt being rare exceptions), largely because coups have been increasingly realized to not be the only way to exercise military influence. The same can also be attributed to the fact that regimes such as Syria have grown to perfect ways to coup-proof their regimes by way of not only military division of labor and compartmentalization, but by the utilization of a well-oiled intelligences services like the Mukhabarat, making it even more difficult for civilian regimes to be disposed of. There are other factors to consider as well, such as the fact that coup-proofing measu res have diluted military cohesion, an incidence which makes it almost impossible for a small, disillusioned detachment of the military to wage a coup without the support of the rest of the larger diversified, and highly specialized military such as the Air Forces. To conclude yes, it can be argued that when compared to recent history, the military is enjoying a rather diminished role in Middle East politics. However, this is owing to a multitude of factors, with no single factor solely responsible for the same. That said, the cases of Israel and Egypt do signify that the military does have a significant role to play, if not directly, but by way of a broader, more pervasive degree of influence that has permeated certain Middle Eastern societies.

Huckleberry finn Essay -- essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  There is a major argument among literary critics whether the adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, is or is not a racist novel. The question focus on the depiction of Jim, the black slave, and the way he is treat by Huck and other characters. The use of the word â€Å"nigger† is also a point raised by some critic, who feel that Twain uses the word too often and too loosely. Mark Twain never presents Jim in a negative light. He does not show Jim as a drunkard, as a mean person or as a cheat. This is in contrast to the way Huck’s father is depicted, who Twain describes using all of the above characterizations and more. The reader views Jim as a good friend a man devoted to his family and loyal to his companions. Jim is however very naà ¯ve and superstitious. Some critics say that Twain is implying that all blacks have these qualities. When Jim turns to his magic hairball for answers about the future, we see that he does believed. This type of naà ¯ve was abundant at the time and found among all races the result of a lack of proper education. So the depiction of Jim is not negative in the sense that Jim is stupid and this aspect of the story is clearly not meant as a racial slight. Next it is necessary to analyze the way in which white characters treat Jim throughout the book. Note that what the author felt is not the way most characters act around Jim and his feelings are probably only conveyed through Huck. In the South during that period, bla...