Madison Popoff

People who mistreat animals are a horrible classification of people that deserve to face

consequences. I chose to do my paper on animal abuse. To go more in detail I chose to look into

the animal fighting aspect of abuse. I chose this because I own a pitbull puppy and they have a

very bad reputation as fighting dogs. I love animals. I have four dogs, two horses, five cats, and

two goats. So I really really love animals. I have always had a compassion for animals that have

been mistreated. We got our first dog names Jewel from a humane society because she had been

abandoned and found on a golf course. She is still alive and a great dog. I’ve had a lot more pets

throughout the years, some ran away, some died from getting hit because my family lives off of a

45 mile an hour road. I think that my real love for animals came from when I started

volunteering at a horse rescue. I worked with one horse named Oreo and she was so shy. I

volunteered there for three years until I moved too far away to be able to continue that. For the

longest time I wanted to actually be an animal cop because I watched the show “Animal Cops”

and I feel like that is something that would make me happy. Recently after a low point in my life

I decided that I needed another dog. I wanted to get a puppy so I thought long and hard about

which breed I wanted and I picked pitbull. I got my little puppy off of craigs list and I adore her.

She is the best thing in the world. When I took her on walks when she was really young people

would run up to her and say how cute she was until they found out what breed she was. That

really upset me because pitbulls have such a bad reputation because people abused them and

their power. I am observing animal cops. I am observing the cops themselves because they have

a standard they hold society to of how animals should be treated. Many people will not go near a

dog of this breed because of the bad things people have to say about them. Any dog could get

into a brawl with a person or another dog but you only hear about it if it is a pitbull. A dog owner

has to pay more insurance if their dog is a pitbull because of the so called “risk” that they are

taking to own such a “horrible” animal. Personally, I use to be really scared of this breed of dogs

before I bought one and that changed my perspective on them. My dog is the absolute sweetest

dog I have ever met. She is a little hyper but she is still a puppy so that is expected. I have had no

problem with her being aggressive at all. Also, it makes me sick to think that my puppy could

have been a fighting dog or a bait dog because she is smaller than other dogs of her breed.

Animal abuse is an overlooked problem in the world. People do not take it as serious as it

should be. No animal asks to be abused. It is not on most people’s minds when thinking about

the crimes going on in their own areas but there are so many animals being abused and

neglected. Many studies have been done and research shows that people will admit to animal

abuse. 10% of males and 9% of females actually admitted to abusing animals at some point in

their lives.

A really big form of animal abuse if animal fighting. There are many different kinds of

animal fighting including dog, chicken, and even hod­dog fighting. Animal fighting technically

is when people encourage two or more animals to fight for their own entertainment. Some

animals are even used as what is called “bait” for training and hunting. Bait dogs are usually a

little smaller or sometimes even handicapped to help train the fighting dogs. No form of animal

fighting is legal and serious consequences are held when caught doing so.

Dog fighting usually is with the breed of dog called pit bulls because of their muscular

build and lock jaws. Two dogs are usually put into a ring and encouraged to attack another. With

any animal fighting there is a lot of money involved but dog fighting is a very expensive activity

to get into whether it be a person betting on one dog to win, or even the dog owner training his

dog to win. As some may remember a famous football player named Michael Vick got

apprehended for being found guilty for hosting dog fights. He later was able to rejoin the NFL

which I think is ridiculous.

Chicken or “cock” fighting is not too heard of today but it is still happening secretly. The

tallon on the chicken is cut off and replaced with a razor sharp blades. The chicken are then let

loose in a pin and attack one another. Most chicken are drugged with steroids and hormones to

grow larger and become more aggressive. The main horrific aspect of this is that the people

running the show will not even put the birds out of their misery when one is dying, they just

leave it to die. It is gross to think that this is a form of entertainment for families. An example of

this is in my observations. I observed the show Animal Cops Houston, and the investigators shut

down a bird fighting facility.

Dog­hog fighting is when a dog is timed to see how long it would take them to attack and

“pin” a wild hog whose tusks have been removed. This is still a form of abuse because this is not

a natural thing for a dog to be doing and it is harming the hog. Any form of animal fighting can

be entertainment but this one is a big form of family entertainment which is horrific.

As any person with a heart can see, animal fighting is wrong. There are many different

types of animal fighting but all are illegal. There is nothing natural about the fighting of animals

in the nature that people are forcing them to. Another form of animal abuse is animal hoarding.

Hoarding is when someone keeps too many things and it takes over their life. It is a

psychological things to say the least, but when it comes to animals, it is still classified as abuse.

It is not fair to animals to keep them cooped up with tens, and hundreds of other animals in a

small area. It is not fair to make the animals have to compete constantly for attention, food,

water, and even just a place to lay down. An animal hoarder can not keep up with their own

animals. This means that each animal is not going to get medical care and that dangers all of the

existing animals in the situation.

I would propose maybe having people come see that pitbull dogs are not vicious animals.

Any animal that is brought up or trained to fight is going to be more of a risk than a dog that has

been cared for properly its whole life. It would be awesome if people could see how obedient the

dogs are so I think that bringing a group of people to a dog park with a lot of dogs and seeing

how pitbulls actually react in a public scenario would be good.

I am particularly proud of this paper because I was really stressed out thinking that I

would not be able to get this finished. I did a lot of research and planning and I do not think that

my paper is half bad honestly. I think going into such detail about my animals and my dog was

going a little above and beyond even if it was similar to my assignment one. If I had more time I

would organize this a little better and research a little more on animal hoarding and the

psychological factors of it. I also think that I could have written more on the figured world so I

will do that for sure when I revise it after the peer workshop.

Assignment Two: What is Leadership?

What makes a good leader? Is it the hair, the obsessive spray tans, the arrogant

comments, the lack of factual knowledge and regard for foreign affairs? America seems to be

fascinated with this new found extraordinary (potential) leader, who only seems to be good at

succeeding to yell to the point where his face goes tomato red and leading this country to its own

grave. Who am I speaking of some might ask? Well I thought it would've been obvious by now,

but if you’re one of “those” Americans, it’s gonna hurt to hear but… it’s the good ole Donald

Trump. Yes, the business man with no consideration for anyone but himself. Sounds like an epic

leader.

I’d love to say that Donald Trump has zero possibility of being the leader of this country

because people have a solid definition of what a true leader is but that would be a very big lie. In

our time era, we have almost no idea what a true leader is because our ideas of what

qualifications a leader are distorted due to the overuse of the media when it comes to politics. We

need a leader like Clinton, JFK or Reagan. Addison, if she wasn’t just a character in Private

Practice, would have those leadership qualities. Maybe not enough to become president of the

United States of America but enough to run Oceanside Wellness. Throughout time, people have

always been separated into two categories: leaders and followers where followers can also be

leaders and leaders can also be followers. The only thing that truly matters is how well one

‘leads’ and that has been up for debate since the beginning of civilized life.

Before going further into my discussion on leadership, I must go over my own

relationship with this topic. I am highly interested in politics and leadership, when I first started

watching Private Practice, the leadership aspect as to who was going to run the practice drama

really stood out to me. It really made me think about what exactly are the qualifications to be a

great leader and whether or not our time era has good leaders who will actually push the United

States to where it needs to be or those just put a face on to lead and ruin relationships with other

countries. This paper talks about how Addison is a good leader and the importance of being a

good leader and its success for an organization or business.

In our world, leadership can either a problem or a solution and it is something we see

almost every day and might not even realize it. Especially in politics; no one is ever 100% happy

with their leaders. Of course, there is no possible way for everyone to every aspire to have a

100% approval rating because for that to happen, we as people would all have to be the same and

that’s just unrealistic and boring. We all love to criticize the ones in charge for doing a “bad Job”

but what really separates good leaders from bad leaders? How can we put leaders into two

separate categories without actually fully knowing all of the regulations and what said leaders

must do to keep things afloat? Who knows, maybe what you specifically don’t like is what needs

to be done in order to succeed in this world. Like in Private Practice, Sam and Naomi weren’t

bad leaders, they just didn’t have the sufficient qualities to run the practice as much as Addison

did due to the fact that they let their feelings get involved with their work space. Even though

Addison never originally intended to become the one in charge of Oceanside Wellness when she

moved from seattle, she has been doing a fairly good job in my opinion especially with being

able to communicate with her “followers”.

Deborah Blagg and Susan Young explain it very simply, one of the key factors of being a

good leader is having good communication skills. (2001). Just like in any workplace,

organization, or government, communication is what keeps everything afloat. Without it, nothing

would ever get done. Addison, unlike Sam or Naomi, has very good communication skills. She

isn’t afraid of what the rest of the practice might think and knows what to say in order to get

things done. Sam and Naomi were only half communicated, and it almost caused the practice to

go under and at that point is when Naomi needed to step in and save the practice.

I suggest creating a class that is focused around what makes a leader, how to be a good

leader and how to know if someone is a good leader or not. This class would be a required credit

in order to graduate. If we start learning what exactly leaders are, then the question of leaders

would be absolute.people are just uneducated in that aspect and rely on what social media tells

them to determine whether or someone is justified enough to lead a country, a business, or an

organization. We all need to start putting an effort into caring about this sort of stuff because all

of the decisions our leaders make or do not make affect us whether we like it or not. The class

will hopefully teach people how to be good leaders, good 'active' followers, and how to pick out

the good leaders from the bad and not just base their opinions on what the tabloids are saying.

We need a change. In order for a change, we as humans need to be formally educated on

leadership because if not, our lives will go under just like Oceanside Wellness almost did in the

hands of Naomi and Sam.

Just like Goleman says, in order to be a good leader, one must be emotionally

intelligent (2004). The same goes for a follower. At least an active follower such as Pete, Dell,

Violet, or cooper. Even though, they aren't technically leading the practice, they are active

followers which means they play an important role within their community of practice. If the

other doctors weren't there and didn't do their jobs, the practice would go under due to the

insufficient funds and lack of medical practice occurring at Oceanside Wellness. There can be a

great leader but if his/her followers aren't just as great at being active followers than the

leadership can all go to waist. A leader can't be a leader without his/her followers.

Leaders can also go unnoticed until a time of crisis by which said little will rise to lead

in tough situations when he or she realizes that they must do what is better for everyone else

even if that means to lead when in reality they don't like that much responsibility. Just like

Addison, she never had imagined being the one in charge of the practice that her best friend and

best friend's husband at the time had started together. When she realized that the practice was

going to go under, she put Sam in charge. Once that didn't work, "the followers" also known as

Pete, cooper, and Violet voted Addison in without her direct acknowledgement that she was

being put up for a vote.

Addison didn’t move from Seattle Grace Hospital to Oceanside Wellness to become the

leader of the practice. Although she was head of the Neonatal department in Seattle, she wanted

a more relaxed life where she could find herself. As a time of crisis emerged at the practice, she

stepped in and did what she had to do. Assignment One argues that leaders can be followers and

followers can be leaders (2015) and in this case, it is very true. Addison came to be a follower

and not a leader but needed to become a leader in order to do what was necessary.

A good leader is one that is constantly learning (Mikkelson, 2015). At Oceanside

Wellness, learning is something that even the followers (Sam, Naomi, Cooper, Dell, and Pete) do

as well as Addison. It is normal for each person in the community of practice to learn off of the

other. In politics this idea is used often for example the relationship with the Cabinet and the

President.

Within Oceanside Wellness, there have been many twists and turns where Addison had to

make quick decisions such as when they had a set number of days to pay a large amount of

money unless they wanted to lose the practice where she had to act fast and she did. Flexibility

plays a key role in leadership (Yukl 2001) because the world isn’t perfect and bad things are

bound to happen in all sort of situations. Another example is the Commander in Chief also

known as the president. Whenever there is a crisis such as with 9/11, the President needs to have

fast responses and be flexible in order to save the country from ultimate doom.

Ghaemi is convinced that whether or not an individual has a mental illness determines

whether or not said person will be a good leader (2011). Although there have been many great

leaders who have had mental illnesses such as JFK and Lincoln (2011), it doesn’t necessarily

mean that only people who have mental illnesses can succeed as a leader. On the other hand,

there isn’t a single person who is 100% perfect in every possible way. As people, everyone deals

with their own separate problems,whether it’s family related, health issues, etc. For example,

Addison deals with bad self­esteem and fear of being alone. Leaders do not have to have a

serious mental illness in order to be a good leader.

(Jobs) Apple, one of the biggest technology companies. It didn’t just pop out of thin air.

Steve Jobs had a passion for what he was doing. In order to succeed in whatever it is you want to

do in life, whether that’s being a leader, a businessman, a video game programmer, you have to

have a passion for whatever you do(Jobs). Just like in Private Practice, each doctor has a passion

for their own field of medicine. Addison has a passion for the Neo­natal division but also has a

passion for the Practice. This is why she does so well in leading the practice and everyone in it.

Sam and Naomi also had this passion, but their passion got mixed with their feelings for

eachother and fear of letting the other one down. With being a leader, you have to have your

head on straight based on what you want.

(WDA Singapore 2013) To be a good leader, one has to have good relationship skills

with their co­workers. If you are mean to your subordinates then nothing will ever get done or if

it does get done, it will get done with poor quality because they will despise doing anything you

say. On the other hand, if you have good relationship skills, things will run more smoothly,

efficiently and everyone will be less stressed. For example, in Private Practice when Sam was in

charge of Oceanside Wellness, no one wanted to do what he was telling them to do because of

the way he said and and the reasoning. He was going completely against what the intention of the

practice was when the originally started it and left the typical hospital setting. Addison on the

other hand, is very good with maintaining a good relationship standing with everyone in the

office because she focuses not just on what the practice needs but also what her subordinates

require in order to be happy to be at work and get things done such as attend to patients.

Leaders come in all shapes, sizes and qualities. We just need to be able to decipher which

ones are worth putting into power and following. The class I want to implement in colleges will

go over all of the topics I have shared with you and many more. Those were just the ones that

stood out to me the most. All in all, a leader has to be unselfish and not abuse their power.

Colin Hien

Ever since 1776, when Phi Beta Kappa, the first fraternity ever, was founded there has

been hazing in fraternities. For the next 217 years it has been a tradition through most all

fraternities to haze pledges to build character, strengthen relationships between pledge brothers,

and test the pledges to see if they are good enough to become a lifetime member of their

organization. In the year 1993 hazing was made illegal after recent injuries and even deaths

occurring in some fraternities. That Law has been very difficult to enforce due to the fact that

fraternity councils at schools are made up of brothers in the fraternities on campus and if they are

for hazing, they can very easily turn a blind eye on the situation. Another reason that it is very

difficult to enforce is because nobody wants to tell on their best friends and get them in trouble.

Believe it or not, hazing brings pledges extremely close together and forms a lifelong bond

between a group of men who would do anything for each other. Not only does it bring the

pledges close together, but if done right, it forms the same bond between the pledges and the

brothers. I am not saying that all forms of hazing should be legal and brothers should have free

reign to beat the shit out of their pledges, but I am one hundred percent for constructive hazing

that builds brotherhood, develops character, teaches respect, and forms lifelong bonds and

friendships.

Hazing can be done in many different ways, from making pledges exercise, and depriving

them of sleep to making them eat strange foods like mayonnaise or onions all the way to

waterboarding, extensive physical abuse, and forcing them to drink till near death. Hazing can

become very dangerous very fast without some restrictions, but at the same time the

restrictions should not be too tight or else they will be forcing two hundred year traditions to

be cut off, stopping new members from having the true fraternity experience, and keeping

them from building the full friendships that they could. At the same time, too much, or too

extreme hazing can cause physical harm, ruin friendships, and in some extreme situations

even cause death. Hazing needs to be constructive and help the new members build

friendships. When hazing is taken too far, it can cause many issues, such as risk of injury

overall discomfort, broken friendships, decrease in grades, depression, suicide, or death.

There is no need to physically harm anybody to prove that they are worth being in your

organization. Most of the hazing stories that make the news have some sort of physical abuse

in them, which is why they are on the news. This is why there still needs to be rules and

safety regulations when it comes to hazing. Physical abuse, such as contact of another person

intended to cause physical pain, injury, or other physical suffering or bodily harm, does

nothing constructive at all, it establishes fear and hatred instead of respect and friendship like

true hazing should. Hazing can get out of hand very quickly, which is why there needs to be

strict restraints on hazing in fraternities to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all the new

members in that organization.

There are many obvious disadvantages to hazing because those are the ones that make

news headlines, such as “Pledge dies due to hazing” but there are a lot of benefits to hazing if

done properly, but you will never see a newspaper headline saying “Pledges taught time

management, and respect through hazing.” The news likes to tell the stories that will get the

viewer’s attention, even if it means not telling half the story. Yes, the stories that the news tell

about fraternity hazing are horrifying and heart breaking, but that is when hazing goes way too

far and gets out of hand. With simple rules and regulations hazing can be greatly beneficial to

both brothers and pledges. It teaches the pledges time management and respect, while showing

them the importance of friendship and builds character. The hazing process help the brothers

because it shows which pledges are deserving of wearing the fraternity letters, shows the

commitment and dedication of the pledges and allows them to see the true character of the

pledges. All of this can be accomplished in a safe and very effective way through hazing. Most

importantly, everything has to be constructive in the long run; Physical abuse and drinking till

near death are not constructive. With minor sleep deprivation, physical abuse, tedious and time

consuming tasks, mind/trust games, and verbal abuse an immature, irresponsible high school

student can be molded into a responsible, respectable man. These days with such strict hazing

rules it is very difficult to accomplish this, I can speak from personal experience about this. My

pledge class and I were not hazed at all and with not the slightest bit of hazing I can honestly say

that I do not have the respect for the brothers and exec members that I should have. I have

respect for my parents because I am scared of them and what they will do to me, but with my

fraternity I know that they won’t do anything to me which means I am not very scared of them

and I can get away with more than I should be able to. There are also still some of my pledge

brothers that I am not that good friends with because we haven’t gone through much together. I

had the chance recently to go down to USC and spend the weekend with them, and USC is

known for hazing their pledges worse than any other chapter of Phi Sig. They did not have any

pledges at the time that I went down there, but I spoke to the ones who were just initiated the day

before and they all had a lot of respect for every one of the brothers, because they were scared of

them for the past eight weeks, but now that they are finally brothers they said that they were

great friends with all the other brothers. I also had the chance to speak to my brother who goes to

NC State and was hazed and there is not one of his brothers that he doesn’t love. After hearing

the stories from my older brother and my dad from what they had to do during the pledging

process I feel like I am missing out on a big part of the true fraternity process and I feel like I

have not earned my way into this fraternity. The pledging process should be set up to make you a

better man and prove that you deserve to wear the letters of your fraternity, and if you think that

the types of minor hazing that I previously stated should not be part of the pledging process then

in my personal opinion you do not deserve to join a fraternity.

There is a huge focus on hazing in fraternities when it is not even that bad, the Navy

SEALS technically haze their new members way more than any fraternity, and if you ask any

one of them if they love the man standing beside them or if they would die for him they will

most definitely say yes. A perfect example to show the bonds created after going through the

extensive boot camp with extreme amounts of “hazing” is the story of Marcus Luttrell. In my

opinion, Marcus Luttrell is one of the greatest American heroes of all time, and he once said this,

“The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is

behind him.” This man was hazed un­mercilessly while going through the Navy SEALS training

camp to prepare him for war and to form the strongest brotherhood and love possible between

him and his fellow soldiers, his brothers, his family. The hazing worked. Before boot camp he

was a rodeo star want to be out of Texas, but he soon met a group of complete strangers who

ended up being a part of SEAL team 10 and he came to love every single one of them through

the bonds that were created from hazing. LT Michael P. Murphy, Matthew Axelson, and Danny

Dietz went through the same hazing and initiation as Marcus did. They loved each other more

than anything in the world and those four men proved their love for each other on top of a

mountain in Iraq with hundreds of enemy soldiers standing in front of them. Those three men

died protecting Marcus as they all fled down the side of a mountain in Iraq from invading

soldiers. They wouldn’t let anybody behind no matter how bad it got; they gave their lives for

their brothers, the ones that they met for the first time in boot camp, the ones that they were

hazed alongside, the ones that they proudly called their family. This might be an extreme

example of the benefits of hazing, but I feel like it really sends a message and relates to a

fraternity a lot. SEALS go through way more stuff then pledges do and nobody says anything

about that. They are deprived of sleep, screamed at, publically embarrassed, and forced to do

physical exercise until they puke. They are pushed to their breaking point and further, which is

way less than any fraternity has ever done, but what they do is perfectly legal, while a brother

telling a pledge to get him a fork at dinner, or making him do a singular push up for being

disrespectful is illegal. Besides the fact that hazing can be very beneficial, the limitations on it

are pretty stupid in my opinion. According to the IFC at UNCC my kindergarten gym teacher has

hazed me, because they forced me to run laps around the gym and do pushups and situps. If my

fraternity were to make me do that stuff they would be kicked off campus and possibly had legal

charges brought up on them. My high school soccer coach forced us to run many miles every

practice, and I would assume that if we refused we would be kicked off the team or at least

punished in some way, but I wouldn’t know because nobody was stupid enough to do it. We

were afraid to disobey our coach because we were scared of what he would make us do. Oddly

enough, my best friends in high school were the other people on the soccer team with me. What

I’m trying to say is that the regulations that are put on fraternities and way too extreme and quite

stupid, because it takes away a great experience and limits the friendships made. Hazing can be

very beneficial if done right, which is proven by the Navy SEALS, Marcus Luttell, and the three

brothers that he lost on top of that mountain.

There are many disadvantaged to giving fraternities free reign over their pledges, but

there are also many disadvantages to not allowing them to do anything to the pledges. This is

why there needs to be a middle ground met that keep the pledges from being physically harmed,

and abused, but don’t treat them like children and protect them from everything. Some simple

five A.M. workouts won’t hurt anybody, all it does is keep the new members in shape and

keeping the fraternity looking good and more attractive to women. From firsthand experience,

without any hazing there is a lack of respect from the pledge class towards the brothers, which

then leads to a poor work ethic within the fraternity, because we know that they won’t do

anything to us. With too much hazing there can be extensive physical abuse, that leads to a

separation between pledge classes, which is when a pledge class gets hazed so bad that they hate

everyone else, and it continues on to the next pledge classes. With a good amount of hazing done

properly, a fraternity can be very successful. Character will be built, brotherhood will be formed,

and respect will be established. Another quote that I really like from Marcus Luttell is, “In death

as in life, we stand together, always a family, always a team. The brotherhood never dies.” I love

this quote because it applies a lot to a fraternity. We will be by each other no matter what

happens because we are a family and through life and death, we are still always brothers. Life

long bonds are formed through the pledging process and being a brother, but in order to become

a brother you should have to earn it and one way that is done is by keeping two hundred year old

traditions alive, but still being safe about it.

Government Informants: How useful are they?

Kaylah Wright

Have you ever wondered how the cops or other government officials get information that

can only be found “on the streets”? Here is a big one to consider: how much crime is the

government allowing to happen in order to catch a bigger crime being committed? Or what about

how people who are also involved in the same crime, sometimes heinous crimes, get time off or

don’t get punished completely? The answer is fairly simple: informants. Informants, or

commonly known in the workforce as CIs (criminal informants), are people (or person) who

provides privileged information about a specific person or agency. This privileged information

can include, but is not limited to, tips about crimes such as murder, drug trafficking, people

trafficking, corrupt cops, etc. Informants are not commonly talked about on the everyday news

channel, but there is a television show in particular that does a pretty good job at explaining

some basic do’s and don’ts of an informant. This show is called The Blacklist and it follows FBI

agents who get their intel from a notorious criminal himself, Raymond Reddington. Watching

this show has made me want to look into informants and the ways that the government agencies

really use them.

Throughout this paper I will researching the aspects informants and what government

officials gain when they use informants as well as the negative aspects they informant may

encounter. I will also be researching what the responsibilities of an informant are because while

watching The Blacklist, since it is a TV show, the viewers know that it is exaggerated and what I

would like to bring new to this topic is negative aspects of being a CI. Along with that I will also

be researching what crimes these informants get away with just the agencies can keep them as

they are. With my research, all of these things are either widely or vaguely mentioned in the all

of the different research that I have done thus far for this paper. Another element that I would be

adding to the topic is whether or not CIs are really necessary to catch and convict criminals. I

will also be researching the safety of the informants as I do my paper.

Though I may not be literally connected to this specific topic, I do have a special love for

The Blacklist and I am happy to analyze the show and apply it to how it is really happening in

the real world and the fact that we as a general public are oblivious to that fact. As a frequent

viewer of the show, since I started my research I have been able to pay more attention to

Reddington and his actual role as an informant to the FBI. Do I think that Reddington and The

Blacklist have truly influenced the actual use of government informants? No. But I do believe

that the show has opened doors for viewers to consider the real aspects of informants and the

things they do for our government agencies and I plan to try to reach every aspect of that help the

agencies receive.

As said in previous paragraphs, as a nation we are oblivious to the fact that government

and other agencies do have to use other resources to find what they need when they are trying to

catch criminals. One of the main reasons that the government ends up using these informants is

because if they are trying to catch illegal activity, they know that they, as law enforcers, cannot

just walk in the place and demand to know what illegal activities were going on. Informants can

also be very useful when the defense attorney and other important players want to make a solid

conviction on the suspect(s). But here is a question to consider: how do you punish someone who

has put there life in danger for you, even if they have committed a crime as well?

Informants may greatly help law enforcement, but the officials are also turning their back

when another crime is being committed by that same informant. For example, about a decade

ago, it was found that the FBI agency admitted that they allowed for James Bulger to operate a

brutal crime ring in order to catch a higher crime; to get information from about a Mafia (Health,

2013, para. 2). What Bulger did was illegal, just like the Mafia, but the FBI overlooking a crime

is also illegal. In The Blacklist we see Reddington getting away with a lot of illegal actions such

as blackmail, murder, money smuggling, and other law breaking things. The issue with the

informants and the crimes they commit is that sooner or later they decide that they are

‘privileged’ and deserve to be let off the hook when they help a cop and that can pose as a threat

to other criminals and what they feel their rights as criminals are.

Since this seems to be a prominent issue with government officials when it comes to

using CIs, I am proposing stricter circumstances in which informants actually get used. There are

other options to consider before allowing someone to commit other crimes just because they are

an informant, that other option being undercover agents or cops. I think that undercover agents

and/or cops are better to use, unlike the criminalist people that they inquire on to commit crimes

and put their life in danger, because these agents and officers took an oath to their state and

country to protect it from criminals, and not to allow criminals to keep breaking the law,

especially with their knowledge. These stricter circumstances would only be if the setting and the

criminals they were trying to catch and convict are is in an “intimate” setting. No, I do not mean

that in a sexual way when I say that. What I mean is the people (person) they are trying to catch

does not have an army of people behind him or a group that will do anything for that person. I

would recommend that it be only one person they are trying to catch and maybe one. I would

disregard criminals such as drug and sex traffickers, drug dealers, rapists, etc. These are the most

heinous criminals there are because no matter how many informants an agency uses, there will

always be one around the corner so I don’t feel there is a need to risk another crime happening or

another life being taken away because they were doing a favor for the government.

In The Blacklist, we as the viewers definitely see Reddington getting away with the

crimes he and his associates commit, but we also see that multiple times throughout the show the

things he does goes back on the agents and they have to answer for his actions and how they

decided to let some crimes happen. This is just a TV show so of course they don’t want to get rid

of any of the main characters, but in the real world there are, and should be, stricter

consequences for agents who allows for other crimes to be committed during their time with

their CIs. I believe that my proposal to put a stop to this nonsense can help a lot of agencies to

understand the consequences of their actions when they allow for corruption to fill their cities

and country. I am not saying that this process will be easy. because change is never easy, but I do

believe that this is a change that needs to occur because if it doesn’t I fear that as a nation we

may have to relook the things we call illegal and the “exceptions” that we allow to happen.

If I had the opportunity to work with officers of the law, the issue of informants would be

bought to everyone's attention because in my heart I feel this is something that needs to be fixed

immediately. It is not only fair to law abiding citizens, but honestly it is not fair to the criminals

who have to serve the time for the crime they committed. If you were a criminal, how would you

feel knowing your equivalent committed the same crime as you, and more under police officials,

and did not get time for it? I’m not a criminal but I know the answer to that question. As a future

lawyer, I want to make this my side project: making sure informants do not get to become the

“privileged criminal”.

The bigger question posed to the government and other agencies is “How can be fix this

problem?” The reason this is a hard question to answer is because individuals do not have any

control over what agents do what and unfortunately cannot keep tabs on the hundreds and

thousands of police agents and FBI agents that they have. My paper discussed what other

alternatives can be used instead of government informants because this doesn’t seem to be a fair

or even safe way to catch criminals. I want everyone who reads this paper to think about

different ways to actually help our police and government agencies so they are not put in

situations that they have to lie and hide behind their superiors when they know they did

something wrong. My topic is also vital because what if our brother, sister, mom, dad, aunt,

uncle, or anybody important had to become a CI and they did something illegal and your family

has to be the ones who suffer from that? How would you react? Honestly, I don’t believe that

there would be anything that you could do.

Here is another question that I would like to pose: how can we retrain our officers of the

law using different tactics when it comes to situations like this? Do you believe that there is a

way to train our officers? I honestly don’t know if we can actually “retrain” our officers because

it is a fact that everyone will not follow the rules of the training and will continue to do whatever

they want just so they can make their case.

Works Cited How The CIA Almost Lost A Key Informant. (2015, January 11). Retrieved October 22, 2015. Use Of Confidential Informants Mostly Unregulated. (2012, September 5). Retrieved October 22, 2015. Kuo, S. (2005). Informant Use. In Official Indiscretions: Considering Sex Bargains with Government Informants (pp. 1649­1651). Colombia. Heath, B. (2013, August 4). Exclusive: FBI allowed informants to commit 5,600 crimes. Retrieved October 29, 2015. Who Really Gets Stung? Some Issues Raised by the New Police Undercover Work. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3, 2015. Martin, R. (2015, March 29). For Undercover Agents, On­The­Job Adrenaline Can Be Addictive. Retrieved November 3, 2015. Wright, K. (2015, October 8). Assignment One. Lecture, Charlotte.