Hi Camacho,

It is quite evident that you gave some thought to this paper. This is based on the problem that you decided to choose. It is quite true that the issue of gun violence can be considered to be a wicked problem. It is an issue that has been persistent for a long time, yet no amicable solution has been brought forward yet. The issue is quite controversial, and people tend to have different opinions on the issue.  The paper has gone ahead and established a deep analysis of the problem. Giving the example of the San Bernardino shooting that happened in December 2015 acts as a vivid example of exactly how this issue has been detrimental. This is a mass shooting that most people involved with this class, if not all came to experience. The fear and uncertainty that comes with such an occurrence becomes quite clear. The paper goes ahead to analyze some sections of Proposition 63. This is very informative since it would give an individual without the knowledge of this policy an idea of what it is all about.

Despite the paper being good and analyzing the problem and the policy, it also has its own shortcomings. The main issue here is the structure of the paper. Some parts that are considered important for the completion of this paper are missing. This has come about due to the problem and policy that have been chosen. Proposition 63 is not expected to take effect until January 2017. As a result, this means that the paper lacks in the implementation section of the policy. There is no explanation of the instruments that have been used in implementing the policy. The role that bureaucracy has played in the implementation of this policy has not been brought out in this section too. The only thing that has happened is predicting that bureaucracy and politics will have their sway in the implementation of the policy. This is more of a guess since you cannot tell exactly what will happen. The other issue is on the results that emanate as a result of the implementation of the Proposition 63. This part is lacking too since the policy is yet to be implemented. One cannot tell whether the policy will be fruitful or not. The introduction section also fails to explain the methodology that would be used to analyze the policy. This would have been good in giving the reader an idea of what to expect.

Simply put, you have had a sufficient analysis of the problem and policy, but this was not a favorable policy to choose for this paper. A good policy would be one that has already been implemented and is currently in use. This way, it would be possible to explain how the policy has been implemented and the issues that have been encountered in the process. It would also be quite vivid on the results that have been achieved as a result of the policy.

Response to Critique

Hi Camacho,

Thank you for your critique. Based on the comments that you have made, it is clear that you read the paper sufficiently. It is true that SGMA is a policy that is not well known to many people. People that are involved in some sectors like agriculture are the ones that are quite privy to this policy. However, the benefits that it has brought to the state cannot be overlooked given the previous conditions. Your comment on the explanation of groundwater and how it all comes about is quite sensible, but there is a limitation based on the nature of assignment involved. There is a limitation as to the number of pages that should not be exceeded. For this reason, not everything can be explained in detail, more so the things that seem to be common knowledge. From the face of it, the term “groundwater” seems quite obvious without needing any further explanation. The confusion that you mentioned about the prosecutorial powers of this policy can be explained. There are other policies that seem to supersede the SGMA in case there is a conflict between the two, and that is why you find some contradicting arguments in page six and page seven.

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?