All posts by HPSH Plaid Line

How drunk driving affects everyone

By: Fatima Mohamud & Sumaya Noor

Not only can drinking and driving put a person at risk, it can also put other people at risk and potentially end many lives. On average, drinking and driving kills about 10,000 Americans per year. According to Nhtsa.gov, about 28 Americans die per day, which is about one person per hour. This is preventable, but over the years it’s been getting worse.

Consuming alcohol can affect the human brain in many ways, but here are some common effects: altered speech, losing judgement, losing track of time, losing sense of balance, altered mood, feeling hyper, and losing sense of direction. Losing a sense of direction is a big part of why many lives are lost to drunk driving, as an individual may not be able to tell where they are turning or how fast they are going.

Even though it’s very illegal, people still tend to somehow let it happen. They can face charges, spend time in jail and this also goes on their record for all future jobs and activities can see.

An individual may have an accident with a price that’s too much to pay, or even have to deal with insurance not being able to cover it.

Here are some ways to help stop drunk driving from happening:

  1. Stop drinking: Drinking is something millions of people do, and it’s normal if you’re over 21, although not healthy to have too much. If an individual keeps it at a moderate level it’s fine, but it can lead to heart or liver diseases and cancer.
  2. Drink at home: If someone is drinking at home, they can spend less time being on the road to get to places, rather than being at a bar and having to drive home.
  3. Ask a friend or family member to drive: this can ensure their safety as well as others.

For more information, please visit:

Should we have summer break?

By: Marcus Lund

I love summer break, and I’m sure you do too. However, is it really as useful as it used to be?

Breaks from schooling are mandatory to both educators and students. It’s the school year’s current format, with one long break in the middle of the year, that is under scrutiny. Summer break was originally started to allow kids to return home during the hottest months to help on the farm. However, with rapid urbanization, and a much lower population farming by hand, this has become increasingly unnecessary.

An increasingly popular alternative to summer break, is a system with more frequent, shorter breaks spread out throughout the year, as opposed to one long one.

So, what are the current pros and cons for this sweet, sweet yearly hiatus?

One pro is how easy it is to cut out meaningful family time during summer break. With more spread out, shorter breaks, a detriment to family structure would occur. Things like finding childcare would become more difficult with parents having to look for babysitters year round.

Spread out breaks would also cause less break overlap between different schools and workplaces, so that families spread out over many occupations and schools would be further separated.

Summer breaks also provide outside-of-school learning opportunities, such as travel and summer camps, that help with character building.

Finally, traditional summer breaks offer a light at the end of the tunnel. Burnt out teachers can have negative effects on students, and vice-versa.

However, the new system has its positives, too. Eliminating a long term break would bring about improved academic achievement. 3 months away from school frequently causes huge gaps in memory and learning, a problem that could be soundly remedied by giving students less lengthy breaks from schooling. This loss of learning affects all children, but it varies by learning level and age.

Summer break can also lead to a lack of engagement, with students frequently getting bored. One expert, Carol Lloyd, says, “If American summer isn’t structured, it’s almost too long.”

I know I want to keep my summer break, but the question is, should I?

Your rights cont.

By: Parker Rowen

The Fourth Amendment is probably one of the most important of all the amendments to understand, and be aware of, as it covers “search and seizure”. A search and seizure is being stopped by, and having the police take a look at your personal belongings. This is known as “inventory”, meaning any assets you may have (such as things on your person, your car, or your house) can be searched. There are quite a few cases within the law which set specific precedent against what does and doesn’t count as a reasonable search and seizure.

The first of these cases is ‘Terry v. Ohio’ (1968). Terry was seen with another man walking up and down the same street multiple times, each looking in the window of a jewelry store. Every time one walked down the block and looked into the store, they would return to the end of the block and talk with the person who was seemingly sizing up the place along with him. Eventually, another man joins the two, and goes down the block once himself; when they all regroup, they begin walking down another street. The officer who spotted this decided to follow these individuals. The officer assumed the men were planning an armed robbery, so they may have a gun. He followed these two and stopped Terry, then proceeded to pat him down.

They decided in this case, the cop had reasonable suspicion to pat Terry down. The actions of Terry couldn’t be defined as reasonable and normal (non-criminal) actions. Therefore, the cop was justified in his search.

This was very important for the concept of a search and seizure, this helped define what could be used as “reasonable suspicion” and lowered the standard for searches. The important piece to take away from this case, is that any and all search and seizures must be “justified at their inception”, meaning the officer must have “articulable facts” to back up the reason for the stop. An officer’s judgments based on speculation are not enough to justify a search, but instead, the facts presented to the officer at the time (in this case, Terry consistently walking up to the same store and peaking inside, along with conferring with another man after every time passing by).

The next case I would like to discuss is ‘St. Paul v. Uber’ (1999). This case was paramount in setting the standard for profiling. “Uber” was a white male, driving a truck registered to Mounds View, Minnesota, in the Summit-University Ave. area of St. Paul, a place at the time known for prostitution, around the hour of 2 a.m., with Uber fitting the profile for a man seeking prostitutes. Uber was seen driving around the same city block by a police officer twice within a 30 minute period; the officer found this behavior to be suspicious and indicative of some sort of criminal behavior, and ran Uber’s plates to discover his suspended license. The officer proceeded to pull him over. When this happened, it was found that Uber was intoxicated and was promptly arrested. The courts found that the facts of Uber’s appearance, or as to why he was in that neighborhood were not relevant, though the suspended license was enough to justify the stop.

An important note from this case is the relevance of why you were in a certain area at a certain time, and simply put: it isn’t. The court ruled that, so long as you are not disturbing the peace, or committing any unlawful acts on public property, you have no obligation to state a reason as to why you are there. You are not allowed to be pulled over for the reason of being in a neighborhood, whether a high-crime neighborhood or not.

The other important takeaway from this, is the “totality of circumstances”, which means that, alongside the articulable facts, less relevant pieces may be used as further justification for a search, such as the cop’s experience on the force, or the suspended license in this case.

 The final case I will be reviewing is ‘Alabama v. White’ (1990). This case was one defining the use of “anonymous tips”. White was found guilty for possession of cocaine, after an anonymous tip came in alerting the police to his behavior. The caller reported White to be leaving his apartment at a specific time, while carrying cocaine in a brown case, in his Plymouth station wagon, with a broken right taillight, and that he would be stopping at a motel at a certain time. Police decided to watch around the apartment, and when they saw a Plymouth station wagon leave and begin to take the most direct route to the motel, police stopped him around a block or two before the motel. When asked to look inside the vehicle, White consented. When they located a locked case matching the description of the one in which the cocaine was supposedly stored, the police requested White to unlock it, and once again, White consented. The police found and seized both marijuana, and cocaine within the case and White was quickly arrested.

The courts found this tip to be enough to justify the stop, as the facts were so specific they decided “Only someone with intimate detail of White’s personal life could know,” these types of facts.

The most important lesson to learn from this, is one about consent. The officers did not have enough information to justify looking within that case, but with White unlocking it at their request, anything found within the case was perfectly admissible as evidence in court via the “plain sight” rule (meaning if something is able to be seen, it is considered being presented to whoever may pass by, and therefore is considered public information).

Your rights against search and seizure are very important ones to understand. Oftentimes, the police will find an excuse to arrest you, and allowing them to search your person is just one tool you’ve given them to do so. There are very specific circumstances surrounding what justifies a stop. Knowing these are important for any defense you may have to make later in your life, and to protect you against tyranny, and abuse of the people, perpetrated by the government.

iPad kids

By: Sarah VonBerge

It is highly debatable whether or not children should be allowed to use iPads, or other screens, for extended periods of time. Because the National Institutes of Health (NIH) did a study, people are now able to look further into the effect electronics have on young kids. It has been shown that screens stunt children’s development by narrowing their focus, interest, and limiting their other means of exploration and learning.

Exploring the outdoors, playing with toys, and playing with other children help them form their imagination and important social skills.

Development happens the most in the first 3 years of their lives and many skills are created by watching the adults around them. If they are looking at a screen, they are not able to take in the world around them. It’s been shown that children under 2 learn more watching someone else teach them as compared to watching a video.

Exaggerated tones and faces help them learn how others around them are feeling or talking to them, without these exaggerations, they are not always able to take in the needed information. Screens and video games cause them to miss out on valuable caregiver interactions that regulate emotions.

Excessive screen time doesn’t just affect emotions and communication, it’s been shown to actually completely change how the brain is formed. It’s been shown that kids who spend more than 7 hours a day on a screen experienced thinning of the brain’s cortex, which is the area related to critical thinking and reasoning.

Kids who spend 2 hours a day on a screen have also been shown to score lower on thinking and language tests. Along with this, it was found that kids who spent more than 2 hours watching TV a day were 64% less likely to get the recommended 10 hours of sleep as compared to kids who spend 30 minutes or less.

5 year olds who spent 2+ hours on screens were 5 times more likely to show symptoms of ADHD compared to children who spent 30 min or less. Although it does not cause ADHD, they’ve been known to be more hyperactive, which is a common symptom in ADHD.

Screen time can trigger the release of dopamine, which is ‘the happy’ neurotransmitter. When you are doing or seeing something that is releasing dopamine, you will not want to get off the screen. Because of this, many children have difficulty putting a screen down, which often results in frustration, anger and/or a complete shut down.

Although it is not completely detrimental to give kids screen time, their time needs to be limited.

For more information, please visit:

What are the benefits of getting the COVID-19 vaccine?

By: Grace Blumer-Lamotte

The COVID-19 vaccines that are being used right now are the Pfizer vaccine, Johnson & Johnson, and Moderna. The Pfizer vaccine is the only vaccine cleared for children currently; it is cleared for children ages 5 through 11.

There is also a COVID booster shot. Everyone over the age of 18 can get it. At first they were just giving it to first responders and people who were more susceptible to get COVID, but now it has opened up more to the public and everyone of the age of 18 can get the booster shot.

According to the CDC, “COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, once fully vaccinated, people can start doing more, and a safer way to help build protection.” 

One of the reasons the vaccine is safe is because millions of people in the US have received the vaccine since they were authorized by the FDA. Another reason is that they have undergone “The most insensitive safety monitoring in US history.” A third reason is “There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines cause fertility problems.” The last reason, the CDC had stated was “The benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks.”

I interviewed a freshman and a junior. I asked them these questions: Have you heard anything about the COVID-19 vaccine causing fertility issues? Have you heard about the tedious monitoring that the US has undergone trying to make the vaccine?

The freshman answered the first question saying, “No, I haven’t.” 

They then answered the second question saying, “Yes I have. I know it took lots of scientists to make the vaccine. They also had a very short period of time to make the vaccine.”

The junior answered the first question saying, “I’ve only heard conspiracy theories about it.”

They then answered the second question saying, “Yes I have. My Mom works at the U of MN and she tells me stories about how long it was taking and what a tedious process it was.”

The COVID-19 vaccine is effective. It helps children and adults from getting very ill. Another reason the CDC states about this was “Getting children ages 5 years and older vaccinated can help protect them from serious short- and long-term complications.”

Once fully vaccinated, people can progressively start doing more. Families/people can resume many activities that they did before the pandemic started. Some activities that you could return to doing that are low risk are: eating outdoors at a restaurant, getting a haircut, going to an outdoor concert, hugging vaccinated family and friends, and visiting elderly relatives that have also been fully vaccinated.

Some other activities that you could return to doing that are medium risks are: eating indoors at a restaurant, going to the theaters, traveling, going to the gym, and getting a massage.

The COVID-19 vaccine is a safer way to help build protection. According to the CDC, “Children ages 5 years and older and adults who are eligible should get vaccinated regardless of whether they already had COVID-19. Evidence is emerging that people get better protection by being fully vaccinated compared with previously having a COVID-19 infection.”

To learn more about the benefits of getting vaccinated, please go to:

‘Red Notice’ Movie Review

By: Eva Olson

‘Red Notice’ is an action/comedy movie starring Ryan Reynolds, Dwayne Johnson, and Gal Gadot. It follows the story of an FBI agent (Dwayne Johnson) and a con-man (Ryan Reynolds) who must work together to catch the world’s greatest art thief (Gal Gadot) and steal the last of three treasured golden eggs.

This movie was pretty fast paced and action packed. There also weren’t a ton of deaths. Most of the fighting in this movie was involving guns or hand-to-hand combat. Although there was a good amount of action there wasn’t much blood or gory scenes.

The plot was very interesting and puzzling. There were a ton of plot twists and betrayals throughout the movie which made the movie more fun to watch.

This movie had a lot of double crosses which made me very eager to see what was going to happen next. All of the plot twists really added to the suspense and mystery of the movie.

I liked the cast and recognized a lot of the actors. The actors suited the roles pretty well in my opinion.

All of the characters were pretty funny and I liked most of them. I enjoyed the main characters’ dynamic between each other and how they would get into unnecessary fights over small things. It was also fun to watch Ryan Reynolds and Dwayne Johnson act in the same movie together.

All of the costumes were really cool and they made each scene feel more realistic. The scenery also made the movie even more captivating. In general, the movie was very eye-catching.

Overall, I would give this movie a 7/10 rating. I recommend it to action/comedy movie fans. You can find this movie on Netflix.

Sports schedule for: Dec 13-18

MONDAYDATE:  DECEMBER 13TH
TIMEBUS DEPART/RETURNEVENTDETAILS
    
TUESDAYDATE: DECEMBER 14TH
TIMEBUS DEPART/RETURNEVENTDETAILS
5:00pm / 7:00pm Girls Hockey vs. North/Tartanat WSP Ice Arena
5:30pm / 7:00pm Girls Basketball vs. Northat North St. Paul High School
5:30pm / 5:30pm 7:00pm Boys Basketball vs. River FallsHOME
WEDNESDAYDATE:  DECEMBER 15TH
TIMEBUS DEPART/RETURNEVENTDETAILS
3:45pm2:20pm / 5:15pmBoys/Girls Nordic Ski Skate Raceat Elm Creek Park Reserve
4:30pm2:45pm / 6:45pmBoys Swimming and Diving vs. Como Parkat Humboldt High School
5:00pm Wrestling Triangular vs. Humboldt / Minneapolis SouthwestHOME
6:00pm Gymnastics vs. Cretin-Derham HallHOME
5:30pm / 7:00pm Girls Basketball vs. Simleyat Simley High School
THURSDAYDATE:  DECEMBER 16TH
TIMEBUS DEPART/RETURNEVENTDETAILS
4:15pm / 4:15pm 6:00pm Boys Basketball vs. Patrick HenryHOME
FRIDAYDATE:  DECEMBER 17TH
TIMEBUS DEPART/RETURNEVENTDETAILS
4:00pm / 5:30pm 7:00pmC/JV: 2:45pm / 6:00pm V: 6:00pm / 8:15pmBoys Basketball vs. Two Riversat Two Rivers High School
4:00pm / 6:00pm Girls Basketball vs. Two RiversHOME
5:00pm / 7:00pm Boys Hockey vs. MoraHOME
5:00pm / 7:00pm Girls Hockey vs. Northern Lakesat Breezy Point Arena
SATURDAYDATE:  DECEMBER 18TH
TIMEBUS DEPART/RETURNEVENTDETAILS
9:00am7:00am / TBDWrestling Invitationalat Trinity School at River Ridge

Public school breaks revolve around Christian holidays 

By: Ella Sutherland

If you go to a public school have you ever noticed how all of your “holiday” breaks are always revolving around Christian holidays? The 2 longest breaks of the school year are winter break and spring break. Those mostly always include the two major Christian holidays which are Christmas and Easter. 

Saint Paul Public Schools have around the same time periods for breaks as many of the Christian private schools. So, even though Saint Paul Public Schools are all inclusive of religions and cultures, there is still almost a bias for when our breaks are scheduled. 

Because school decided to schedule these breaks to be around Christian holidays, students that are not Christian have to miss school or go to school and postpone their special holiday. For example, many Jewish students have had to miss many days of school this fall because of Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah, which are very important Jewish holidays that should be recognized. And even though they get excused absences for missing school the students are still missing classes and important information and sometimes even tests.

 If schools arranged for breaks to revolve around many holidays and break it up, instead of having 2 long breaks, people might feel more included. Also, in elementary schools, at least mine for example, we would do arts and crafts like a week before winter break and lots of the crafts would have Christmas trees and Santa. We only ever really talked about Christmas around that time and never included any other religious holidays. This wasn’t just around the winter break, it was around most Christian holidays.

Public schools need to start respecting holidays that are important for other religions and not just Christianity. That includes cultures such as the Hindu holiday of Diwali, and the Islamic holiday of Eid. Schools should just start thinking about this. 

For more information, please visit:

The Stanford Prison Experiment

By: Annika Getz

In August of 1971, the Stanford University psychology department led an experiment which was meant to test the effect of prison life on the inmates. Stanford psychology professor Philip Zimbardo constructed the “Stanford County Jail” in the psychology building basement. The cells were created by taking doors off of lab rooms, and replacing them with doors made specially with cell numbers, and steel bars. Inside the cells, there was room for three cots, and little else. There was a corridor which they called “The Yard”; this was the only place where the prisoners could walk, exercise, or eat. If a prisoner needed to use the restroom, he was blindfolded and taken down the hall, this way they didn’t know the way out of the prison. There was also a small closet opposite of the cells which was used as solitary confinement.

Cameras and intercom (which made it possible to bug the cells, as well as make announcements to the prisoners), allowed the experiment leaders to monitor the guards and prisoners at all times. There were no windows or clocks in the prison.

The guards and prisoners were college students, who had responded to an ad posted in the local newspaper. They were then given personality tests, and diagnostic interviews, so as to eliminate candidates with mental health issues, medical disabilities, or histories of crime or drug abuse. Over 70 applicants answered the ad, and 24 were left after the interviews. These 24 were randomly assigned to be either prisoners or guards, and promised 15 dollars a day for participating in what was supposed to be a two week experiment.

On the day of the experiment, the volunteers were gathered via a mock mass arrest. Real police cars came through and picked them up at their houses, and charged them with anything from a Penal Code violation to armed robbery. They were searched and handcuffed, in front of their families and neighbors, who of course, didn’t know of the experiment.

Once they arrived at the prison, they were met by the “warden”, who was an undergraduate at Stanford, David Jaffe. They were then fingerprinted and identified, and taken to a holding cell, where they were blindfolded and left to wait. Each prisoner was then stripped and searched, then deloused with spray. They were given uniforms of smocks, with their prison ID numbers (which is all they were referred to as, never names) on the front and back, and a stocking cap (to simulate real prisoners’ heads being shaved). The final item of their uniform was a chain worn on their feet at all times. It was made in such a way that when a prisoner would turn in his sleep, the chain would hit his other foot, so even in sleep he would remember he was in the prison.

The guards were not given any training, they made their own rules, and were allowed to do whatever they wanted (within reason) to enforce these rules. They were dressed in khaki uniforms, with a whistle around their necks, a club borrowed from the police, and mirrored sunglasses so their eyes couldn’t be seen. In the beginning, three guards would work eight hour shifts, while three prisoners occupied each three cells. The guards fell into their roles quickly and rashly, coming up with creatively sadistic punishments, such as forcing prisoners to do pushups while a guard or fellow prisoner stepped on his back.

On the first night, the prisoners were woken by blasting whistles at 2:30 A.M., the whistles signaled for the first of many “counts” where the guards called the prisoners numbers for roll call. These counts happened several times during a shift, very often at night, and allowed for the guards to show their control over the prisoners.

On the morning of the second day, a rebellion broke out. The prisoners took off their ID numbers and stocking caps, and barricaded the doors to their cells with their beds. They then cursed out the guards, who quickly became agitated. When the morning shift arrived, they were upset with the night shift, blaming them for the prisoner’s outburst. The morning shift demanded reinforcements, and the night shift guards agreed to stay on to help handle the situation, three guards on stand-by at home were also called in.

Using a fire extinguisher, the guards shot the carbon dioxide at the prisoners, forcing them away from the doors. They then broke into the cells, stripped the prisoners, took their beds, and took the rebellion leaders into solitary confinement. The guards then decided that in order to squelch any future rebellions in its tracks, they would use psychological tactics to manipulate the prisoners. They ended up creating what they called a “privilege cell”. The prisoners least involved with the rebellion were put in the cell, and given their beds and uniforms back, allowed to brush their teeth, and were given special food to eat around the others, who were temporarily not allowed to eat. However, after half a day of this, the guards took the prisoners who had participated in the rebellion into the “good cell” and the ones who hadn’t in the “bad ones”. This of course, confused the prisoners, who came to the conclusion that the leaders of the rebellion were secretly informants, which led to a breaking of alliances amongst the prisoners.

The rebellion also brought a greater sense of “us vs. them” to the guards, who now, rather than seeing the prisoners as just other college students, saw them as troublemakers, who were out to cause problems.

Less than three days into the experiment, prisoners’ #8612 psychological state worsened significantly. He was crying uncontrollably, his thinking was disorganized, he was enraged. Rather than letting him go, or doing a real evaluation of his mental state, the organizers found themselves so enthralled in their own experiment, that they thought he was faking it to be released. When they had the prison consultant interview #8612, he was chided for being weak, and told about the abuse he could have expected in San Quentin Prison.

In a later interview the “prisoner” said “I was told that I couldn’t quit, and at that point I felt that, well, it was really a prison, and at that point—I don’t know I just—there’s no way to describe how I felt, I just felt totally hopeless, more hopeless than I had ever felt before.”

During the next count, the prisoner told the others “You can’t leave. You can’t quit.” He then began screaming and cursing, in a seemingly out of control rage. Finally, the organizers deemed him as truly unstable, and released him. The prisoners were left with the line between reality and experiment blurred in such a way which left them feeling as hopeless as #8612 had.

The following day, visiting hours were held. Worried that family and friends would want their sons released upon seeing the state of the prison, the organizers decided to clean up the environment. The boys were washed, their cells were polished, and they were given a big dinner. Music even played over the intercoms.

Still early on in the experiment, the organizers heard rumor of an escape plot. Rumor was that #8612 was going to gather his friends, and break in to free the prisoners. The organizers did not respond to this rumor as psychologists. They didn’t let it play out and record the results, rather, they responded as prison wardens and superintendents. Concerned for the security of their prison, they put an informant in the cell that had been #8612’s. They even asked the Palo Alto Police Department if they could transfer the prisoners there. The request was, of course, denied. Instead, the organizers had the guards chain the prisoners together, put bags over their heads, and bring them to a storage room in the building. The rumor however, ended up being false. The plot to escape never came to be.

A Catholic priest was then invited to evaluate how realistic the simulation was. When interviewing the boys, he told them that if he wanted them to, he’d contact their parents to get a lawyer. Some of the boys accepted this offer.

Prisoner #819 was the only prisoner who wouldn’t speak with the priest, he was sick, and refused to eat, wishing to see a doctor. When he was eventually persuaded to come out of his cell, he broke down, crying hysterically. His cap and chain were taken off, and he was then sent to wait in a different room for a short time, until Dr. Zimbardo could get him food, and take him to a doctor. While Zimbardo was doing this, a guard lined up the prisoners, and had them chant “Prisoner #819 is a bad prisoner. Because of what Prisoner #819 did, my cell is a mess, Mr. Correctional Officer.” They chanted in unison again and again, as though they were one unified voice, whereas on the first day, their voices had been messy, and disorganized.

While they were chanting, Dr. Zimbardo realized that #819 could hear them from where he was waiting. He raced back to find the boy sobbing uncontrollably, listening to his fellow prisoners, his peers chant that he was bad. When Zimbardo suggested that they leave, #819 refused, saying he had to prove he was a good prisoner. Zimbardo then told him, “you are not #819, you are [his name], and my name is Dr. Zimbardo. I am a psychologist, not a prison superintendent, and this is not a real prison. This is an experiment, and those are students, not prisoners, just like you.” Only then did the boy’s crying stop, and he agreed to leave.

The final rebellion seen in the experiment, was done by Prisoner #416, a standby prisoner who’d been admitted to replace the few who had been released. This boy arrived at what was basically a horror show, and was told by the others that you couldn’t quit, it was a real prison. In response, he went on a hunger strike, so the organizers would have to release him. The guards put him in solitary confinement after unsuccessfully trying to get him to eat, he stayed there for up to three hours, despite their own rules stating that the limit was an hour. #416 still refused to eat.

The guards proceeded to tell the other prisoners, that if they gave up their blanket, and slept on their bare cots, then #416 would be let out of confinement. Most prisoners elected to keep their sheets, seeing #416 as a troublemaker. #416 would have been left in confinement all night, had the organizers not stepped in to lead him back to his cell. Later, #416, who’s real name was Clayton, remarked about feeling as though he was losing his identity.

On just the fifth night, parents began requesting for lawyers to be contacted after talking to the priest who had interviewed their sons. It was at this point that the organizers knew they had to end the experiment, their simulation had been so powerful, that the prisoners were having pathological responses, and the guards (who the personality interviews deemed perfectly normal boys), either became sadistic, or felt hopeless to intervene. They were further prompted to end the experiment when watching the videotapes of the night shift. The guards, thinking that the researchers weren’t watching, escalated their abuse of the prisoners, presumably due to boredom. The final reason they ended the study was the objections of Christina Maslach, a Stanford Ph. D brought in to conduct interviews with the boys. Because of all this, the study ended only six days after beginning.

This experiment remains to be one of the most well known psychology experiments ever conducted, coming to the conclusion that people do, or become things, they wouldn’t expect from themselves when placed in the correct environment.

For more information, please visit:

Oxford High School shooting

By: Citlaly Castillo-Thoren

On Tuesday afternoon, November 30, a gunman entered Oxford High School and opened fire, injuring 10 students and a teacher. 4 students died from their injuries.     

Security cameras showed 15-year-old suspect, Ethan Crumberly walking in the bathroom and exiting with a firearm, moments after he got out of a conference with school staff and parents about his “concerning behavior”.

Shorty after he exited the bathroom, he walked down the hallway pointing the gun and shot students.

The suspect surrendered when cops approached him. 

The teen had a permit to legally hold and fire a gun in certain locations, like private property and the gun range.  He used a semi automatic handgun, or a 9mm Sig Sauer SP2022 pistol, that his dad bought on Black Friday.   

The superintendent put out a statement video that is 12 minutes long. First he apologized to the families who lost loved ones from the shooting. Then, he goes on to say that the schools will not be able to reopen for weeks.  “This school is a wreck. It’s a war zone,” Superintendent Throne said.

Ethan has been charged with 24 felonies, including four counts of murder, and one count of terrorism. He is being charged as an adult.

The parents of Ethan are facing charges of four counts of homicide, and involuntary manslaughter.  Many sources say that the school or his parents could have prevented the shooting. Moments after the school announced there was an active shooter in the school, Ethan’s mom texted him: “Please Ethan don’t do this.” 

James Crumley And Jennifer Crumley pled not guilty to the charges against them. After their son did the shooting, they left town. They said they were unaware of the scheduled arraignment time and said they weren’t fleeing prosecution.