Chapter 19 History BLAH Flashcard

Chapter 19 History BLAH

What Does Your Handshake Say About You

What Does Your Handshake Say About You We all think we have a killer handshake. And we’ve all shaken a few hands that left us feeling†¦ less than impressed. Find out if any of these subpar shakes apply to you. The Cold FishThe worst handshake is the limp handshake. It makes everybody squeamish. If you’re not squeezing or shaking, but merely laying your hand (or worse, just your fingers!) into someone else’s, then it might be time for remedial work.The Wet FishRegardless of the limpness factor, if your hand is sweaty or clammy, you don’t stand a chance of making a good first impression. Clamminess implies that you are nervous- or worse, ill- or just generally moist. If sweating is a problem for you, try using a bit of talc after you wash your hands to keep them dry.The PrincessYou know who you are. You lay your fingers daintily into someone else’s waiting grip, but nothing further. Unless you’re actually royalty, this is sending all the wrong signals. Man up and shake hands!Th e Knuckle CrusherYou also know who you are. You enjoy watching people flinch as you shock and awe them with your grip and grasp. If you’re not aware of your own strength, ask yourself: does your handshake make people’s eyes water? Can you feel their rings crushing their fingers? If so, go a little gentler.The CreeperIndustry standard is grab, shake three times, release. If you’re lingering any longer than the time it takes to pump your interviewer’s hand a couple of times, then you’re lingering too long. Save the tender contact for the dinner table with your sweetheart and get back to business.The Two-HanderThis is for family on occasions such as funerals and weddings and reunions. Or for your Great Aunt Rita. Or for politicians and priests. It’s not for you. And certainly not for the office. Stick to the basics!We make our first impression in just over five minutes; that’s not a lot of time. Don’t spoil it with a bad handshake .Instead, follow the golden rule: warm, friendly, confident, and dry. Make sure to touch the web of your hand (between your thumb and index finger) to theirs, grip comfortably and firmly (not too firmly!), shake three times (but not religiously!), let go, and smile your surest smile.

About me Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

About me - Essay Example My family has never faced any financial challenges but my father wanted me to experience every field of work to realize the importance of all kinds of jobs. My first job experience was at Starbucks; I worked there in 2001 and learned that every job needs hard work and commitment to excel. I was often discouraged by my peers and their families about working in a coffee shop; they did not understand the purpose of my work when my father owned companies to his name. My answer to this query was always that my father wants me to learn the real meaning of life and that it is not easy to earn money in life. Then, in the summer of 2002, I worked in a car workshop as a mechanic. I learned many new things about cars during my experience in the workshop. This is when I started loving cars and car racing became one of my hobbies. My love for cars has been analogous to a mother’s love for her babies. That place is special to me also because I bought my first car from there. In the last sum mer before graduation, I worked in a reputable advertising firm; I really enjoyed working there and felt as if this field of work is meant for me. The respective job experience made me realize that I needed to pursue my studies in the field of marketing since it interested me the most. Therefore, I have come to USA to continue my Masters in the field of marketing and to make my parents proud of my accomplishments.

Accounting for Costa Company Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Accounting for Costa Company - Essay Example expenses 4,500 Property taxes 6,500 Rent 22,000 Operating Income 84,100 1. The case of Costa Company reflects a case having one error in the valuation of closing inventory recorded in the company’s books and one omission of sale transaction. Both types of mistakes made by the company can have significant impact on the true reflection of the company’s financial position. As in the case of incorrect valuation of inventories being overstated has a negative impact on the book value of the company and at the same time it causes costs of goods sold to be understated. The understatement of cost of goods sold has a positive impact on the company’s profitability (Weygandt, Kimmel, & Kieso, 2010). This is often done by managers in order to fictitiously boost the company’s profits in the short term to gain certain financial benefits and later on losses are recorded in books, which would ultimately have a negative effect on shareholders’ value invested in the c ompany. Moreover, companies are often involved in changing methods of inventory valuation i.e. FIFO, LIFO, and Average Costing between accounting periods, which if performed without proper scrutiny could lead to major change in the value of the company’s closing inventory and hence, making the financial statements incorrect reflections of the business position. It is therefore necessary for businesses and regulators to ensure that companies maintain uniformity in the selection and application of the accounting standards. If it is deemed necessary then previous accounts must also be revised to reflect the true position of the company’s business (Fridson & Alvarez, 2011). On the other hand, omissions are regarded as certain transactions or amounts deliberately or non-deliberately left out of the company’s books and no entries are made by the company (Warren, Reeve, & Duchac, 2012). In the case of Costa Company, although the amount of sale transaction was not signi ficantly high, but certain transactions could surely mislead the company’s financial position reported to shareholders. This would cause understate profit of the company and hence, it would affect the equity position of the company which is reported as retained earnings in the company’s balance sheet (Porter & Norton, 2010). 2. From the income statement of Costa Company as prepared above it could be indicated that the company is generating a gross profit of $211,790 which is arrived at after deducting costs of goods sold after making adjustment to the closing inventory value from the company’s revenues, which are also adjusted for the missing transaction of $5,000. This reflects that the company is operating at high gross profit margin of almost 34% in the year 2012. After deducting all operating expenses and property taxes the company has generated a net income of $84,100. This is lesser than before which was recorded without taking into account errors and miss tatements. This indicates that if companies fail to take into business transactions or wrongly value and report an entry then this could lead to falsification of the entire financial statement and incorrect information passed onto shareholders who rely on the financial statements for their decisions (Fridson & Alvarez, 2011). This reflects that the company has a net profit margin of 13.5%. All these indicators reflect that the company is a profitable entity and shareholders can expect good returns on their investments in the company. 3. Costa Company 31-Dec-12 Balance Sheet Current Assets Accounts receivable 18,000 Cash 41,500 Inventory

Discussing Linguistics Issues Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Discussing Linguistics Issues - Assignment Example â€Å"Phatic Communication† refers to everyday small talk. It may consist of repeatedly and trite phrases. However, it is impossible to live without any phatic communication throughout the day regardless of how clichà ©d it appears to be. It may be verbal or non-verbal. Verbal communications would include " hi" and "hello", small talk about weather, sports and politics, while non-verbal communications would consist of waving to a friend at the bus stop or ending a business deal with a firm handshake. In the cyber world, chat rooms are a perfect example of phatic communications. Phatic communications are usually devoid of any facts or figures or useful information, but it helps an individual, to a great extent, to socialize with ease and to remain in touch with one's colleagues, friends, family members without putting any pressure to be informative on him or her (Michael Pollick) Meaning of a word refers to a feature common to all scenarios. That means a word would carrying all meanings, which would be appropriate socially, culturally and also conforms to reality. However, the true and complete meaning of a word is only understood when used while socializing with other people. However, there is never one meaning of the word. Different people use a word differently, in different situations. "Social Meaning" refers to the meaning of a word that is most commonly used. A word may have many meanings but there might be few or one that is most frequently used by people while communicating and socializing with other people this is the "social meaning" of the word. (Bloch, Trager,1942)

The Wifes Story Ursula Le Guin

The Wifes Story Ursula Le Guin Ursula Le Guin tells us in The Wifes Story, about a woman who meets a man who would later become her husband and father to her children. This story has a great twist on what the werewolf and human perspective. Told from the wifes view, it shows her love for her husband and children. As time goes on she notices something different about her husband. Having to choose between the two of her loves, she will have to make a decision of whether to save her husband or her children. Ursula Le Guin will show us how our minds can be trick into believing what we perceive. Many times our views will be predetermined before we gather all the facts. Often times siding to what we hold to be right or wrong, good or evil. After reading this story and gathering all the facts, it is amazing on how fast we switch our thoughts on which side we emphasize with. Not only will the readers allegiances that are put to the test but also the wifes. Through the telling of this story she will manipulate our imaginations. She will lead us to the complete opposite of what we are thinking. It will not be until the ending that we find out we have been tricked. Being told from the wifes view, we sympathize with the wife. She will lead us into believing that her husband is cursed and is changing, that this once good and loving man is turning evil and is going to be a danger to her and her children After watching the way the he interacts with his mother and playing with the children, she finds him to be a kind and gentle man. Anyone that nice must be worth knowing (Le Guin, 2012, p 29). He always seemed to be happy, never in a foul mood. This is what would eventually lead her to fall in love with him. The wife describes him as a good husband and a good father (Le Guin, 2012, p 29). Being a young and hard worker he was look up to by the community. This is a recipe for the perfect man for her. During the first year of their marriage, life was wonderful for them. Soon we will start to see changes from him. As their life goes on, she starts to describe strange behavior from him. He would start waking up during the night. Unable to sleep, he would tell her he was going off to hunt. After these trips he seemed to be different, tired and worn. This good natured man would be terse and short, not wanting to talk about where or what he was doing. His wife would also know that there was a scent to him that could not be washed away, It would be in his hair and in our bed for days (Le Guin, 2012, p 30).This starts to give us the idea that the wife is starting to be concerned about what is happing to her husband. Le Guin gives us clues as to what this behavior stems from. Giving us key words she leads us to believe that this man is turning into a beast. The curse comes from his fathers blood and it only happens in the dark of the moon (Le Guin, 2012, pp. 29, 30). She also tells us the he is not from around these parts, a stranger here with no ties to the community. There is very little known about his true background. Le Guin was careful to not give to many details about how the story would turn. She lets the readers imagination take them where they lead themselves too. This would give us a realization as we find out how our own thoughts and preconceptions can betray us. The wifes suspicions start to grow, along with our own. When the youngest of the children seemingly just overnight (Le Guin, 2012, p 30), starts to fear her father, we have a sense that that the wife is not the only one who notices these changes. The father tries to play the fear of the child off as a bad dream. The wife still does not want to believe what she feels, admonishes the baby for her bad behavior. We discern now, that he knows there is something terribly wrong with him. He is either in denial or does not want his family and community to find out the truth. As she states that he kept away that whole dayprobably sensing the beginning the dark of the moon (Le Guin, 2010, p 30) Not only do we believe that the wife is in danger but, now also the whole family. As most of us probably have seen a werewolf movie or more, recognize what dangers may lay ahead. Now that Le Guin has our interest peaked, she will push our own thoughts even farther against us. Now that Le Guin has our full attention. She will reveal the truth of the story. The wife would wake up during the night to find that he husband is not in bed. He has once again wakened up and left. Hearing a noise she could no longer bare it (Le Guin, 2012, p 30), she goes to investigate what is going on. The wife sees her husband sitting outside. Her fears hold her in place as she starts to witness his transformation. His feet are getting longer with toes, as he starts to turn fleshy whiteà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦losing his hair to become smooth skinned, his ears disappear and his eyes turn blue and white rimmedà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦then standing on two legs (Le Guin, 2012, p 30). He has change into a human man. All along we have been thinking he was human and was cursed to be a werewolf. We find that the story was being told from the werewolves point of view. The wife finally sees for herself that he has been cursed, My dear love, turned into the hateful one (Le Guin, 2012, p 30). We know that the wife and werewolf community have dealt with human men before. The man thing looked around. It had no gun, like the ones from the man places do. I knew the man would kill our children if it could (Le Guin, 2012, pp. 30, 31). We get that the wolves have been hunted down before and killed by her reaction. She fears for her childrens lives even though the man in unarmed. She starts howling, alerting others of her kind. They would chase down the man and kill him.

Essay --

Genetically Modified Plants and its Impacts Biotechnology, a merging of biology and technology, has greatly contributed to our current well-being. Scientists employ biotechnology to develop medicinal treatments, alternative energy, and agricultural products. Its advances also enable scientists to alter organisms through genetic engineering, a biotechnological technique, involving modification of DNA and the transfer of gene components between species to promote replication of specific traits. Scientists apply this technique to a wide range of organisms including plants. Genetically modified plants (GM), namely transgenic plants, contain traits such as better nutritional quality, tolerance to insecticide and diseases, and greater yield. These GM crops impose benefits on human health, environment, and economics. However, a number of scientists and organizations criticize GM crops despite its advantages. The opposition argues that GM crops put potential risk on not only human health but also the environment, leading to increasi ng use of herbicide and allergic reaction in some people. Evidence regarding GM crops controversy reveals how biotech companies suppress research that would otherwise reveal adverse effects of transgenic plants to the public. Genetic engineering is a modern biotechnology technique, which allows gene slicing and transferring between one organism and another. This altered genetic make-up results in the change of certain protein production that indirectly removes or adds certain features to modified organisms. Genetic modification differs from traditional biotechnology because genes of animals, plants, and bacteria can be combined to create organisms with altered traits that would not occur naturally. This tech... ...n manipulating and limiting independent research on GM plants clearly undermines the credibility of information obtained through research institutions funded by these companies. The majority of published researches has shown potential benefits of GM plants in producing more nutritious foods, decreasing use of insecticide, and increasing farmers’ profits. However, there is a tendency that these studies are conducted in favor of biotech companies. The studies on GM plants’ negative impacts are still scarce due to manipulation by biotech companies. Due to the lack of independent scientific research on the impacts of transgenic plants, it is crucial for consumer to have the right to choose whether they want to consume GM plants or not. To do so, GM labeling law must be passed. And it can only be done if more consumers participate and support the GM labeling movement. â€Æ'

Amendment 2 “The Right to Bear Arms”

This report provides background information about the Second Amendment. Also it offers a viewpoint on the magnitude and nature of the problem â€Å"right to keep and bear arms† and discusses the two competing interpretations that predominates the Second Amendment. Furthermore this report identifies political, cultural, administrative, and law enforcement realities that pose enormous obstructions to formulating, passing, implementing, as well as enforcing more gun controls. IntroductionRegardless of being the subject of huge popular and political controversy, until relatively recently the Second Amendment was one of the most neglected areas of constitutional scholarship. The regulation of arms is not just a technical problem. It is an extremely charged ideological and emotional issue that carries an incredible amount of symbolic baggage. For American society, the debate over gun control is more like the debates over abortion and school prayer than like a debate over automobile safety.Millions of Americans, together with a noteworthy percentage of the intellectual elite, think that guns are bad in themselves and that owning them is at best misguided and at worst pathological. For millions of American gun owners, the right to keep and bear arms is associated to freedom and democracy; it is an article of faith similar to the belief that other Americans have in the centrality of freedom of speech and religion.That several Americans dismiss the right to bear arms as a myth that has no legal or constitutional reality is a challenge to the believers' worldview and offend to their very status in American society. It is just a short step to considering the proponents of gun prohibition as â€Å"enemies† to be resisted and condemned. Two competing interpretations of the Second Amendment predominate, the â€Å"collective† or â€Å"states' rights† interpretation and the â€Å"individual rights† interpretation.In the collective rights model , American citizens have no individual right to bear arms; such a right, it is argued, belongs merely to those in the state militias since the purpose of the Amendment was to reassure the states that through the maintenance of â€Å"well regulated† militias they would be capable to protect themselves from any danger posed by the new national government's standing army.On the contrary, advocates of the individual rights interpretation contend that the Second Amendment protects the rights of all individuals to keep and bear arms (subject to certain conditions), not just those in the state militias; that it is the â€Å"right of the people. † This, it is argued, is in reference to how the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments are interpreted.While the terms â€Å"republican† and â€Å"liberal† have clear-cut meanings to historians, the use of these terms can be quite confusing to the uninitiated, since the â€Å"republican† school of Second Amend ment interpretation would doubtless find themselves at variance with many Republican politicians today, and the â€Å"liberal† school of Second Amendment analysis, with a few notable exceptions, would probably prefix the word â€Å"classical† before calling themselves liberals of any sort. (Clayton E. Cramer, 1994).The republican school asserts that the right to keep and bear arms was an outgrowth of republicanism, intended to protect the society from the related evils of a standing army and tyranny. While the arms might be broadly distributed, they would still be possessed by the population for the purpose of collective action against a foreign army, or a domestic tyrant. (Clayton E. Cramer, 1994). The liberal school asserts that the right was individual, a logical outgrowth of the right to self-defense. Such arms would be for the defense of the individual against private criminals; there was no need for a collective purpose or ownership.(Clayton E. Cramer, 1994). Whe n it comes to the question of identify the intellectual and historical antecedents of the Second Amendment, there is, again, broad agreement between the collective and individual rights theorists. Whether tracing its roots through the Florentine political tradition and Machiavelli or the radical English Whig tradition of James Harrington, John Trenchard, and Thomas Gordon, both sides accept that the Second Amendment has to be understood, at least in part, in terms of republicanism.Particularly, there is no argument that an armed citizenry was, as militia members contend, an essential component of eighteenth-century republican thought. The cause for this, in Gordon Wood's memorable phrase, is that republics were seen to be states of â€Å"fragile beauty† Which is to say, that due to man's continual craving for power it was believed that republics were in constant danger from both external enemies and internal corruption, and citizens' militias were regarded as very important i n resisting these dangers.(Gordon S. Wood, 1969) Certainly, the militia movement's engagement with republicanism assists to elucidate why it reacts to any attempt at gun control with horror. After all, it was a commonplace of eighteenth-century republicanism that merely tyrannical governments would attempt to disarm their people. Voicing such concerns-and linking them to the sacrifices made by America's Revolutionary generation-the U. S. Militia takes the view that even though â€Å"foreign governments may disarm their subjects, we will not go down that road.† â€Å"We will not disarm,† they declare. As militia members see it, the right to bear arms allows Americans â€Å"to back up our other Bill of Rights. † Lose this right, they compete, and, sooner or later, they will lose all their rights. Republican support of citizens' militias went beyond the often expressed concern that standing armies might turn out to be the pawns of corrupt governments, and issues of who eventually controlled the means of force in society, however. The ownership of arms was essential to the very idea of republican citizenship.Arms, it was argued, provided the means by which a citizen could both maintain his independence and-as with jury service-actively participate in his own governance. In classical and early modern republican thought, arms were the â€Å"ultimo ratio whereby the citizen pictures his life to the protection of the state and simultaneously makes sure that the choice to expose it cannot be taken without him. It was the possession of arms which made a man a full citizen, able to, and required to display, the multiple adaptability and self-development which is the crown of citizenship. Access to arms would not create a republican citizen in itself, though.The key to citizenship certainly the key to the successful functioning of republican society as a whole-was to be found in the concept of virtue. Wood describes virtue as the â€Å"willingness o f the individual to sacrifice his private interests for the good of the community† (Gordon S. Wood, 1969) that is, to serve the common good-and the ultimate sacrifice an individual could make, certainly, was to lay down his life in defense of the republic. This is mainly worth noting since it adds a republican dimension to the obvious readiness of militia members to sacrifice themselves in emulation of their Revolutionary forefathers.Considerably, militias were seen as institutions in which citizens could be trained in virtue-where virtue would not merely be inculcated and nurtured, however as well exercised in the act of resisting the republic's enemies. Modern militia members are well aware of these aspects of republicanism: that militias were intended to offer a means for citizens to vigorously participate in the republican polity and had a vital role in instilling virtue in those citizens. Pro– and anti–gun control proponents sharply disagree regarding whethe r the Second Amendment poses an impediment to gun controls.Gun control proponents argue that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with individual rights; it guarantees merely that states can maintain organized militia units. They point to an unbroken line of court decisions that reject Second Amendment challenges to federal, state, and local gun controls. Gun owners' rights supporters cite a large and impressive composition of mostly historical scholarship that reveals that the founding fathers and, subsequently, the authors and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment, intended the Second Amendment to protect the individual American's right to be armed.There is much to be said on both sides of the constitutional debate. The great majority of state constitutions have clauses protecting the right of gun ownership. The merely states whose constitutions do not hold a right to bear arms are Iowa, California, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and Minnesota. However, Iowa's, California's, an d New Jersey's constitutions openly protect the right to â€Å"self-defense. † Some state constitutions use the same language as the Second Amendment, however several openly protect the individual's right to keep and bear arms.Consider Vermont's constitution, enacted in 1777: â€Å"That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State—and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. † http://www. law. ucla. edu/faculty/volokh/beararms/statecon/htm Pennsylvania's constitutional right to bear arms is measured to be the precursor to the Second Amendment.Enacted in 1790, at the time that the Bill of Rights was being ratified, it states: â€Å"The right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned. † http://www. law. ucla. edu/faculty/vol okh/beararms/statecon/htm This language has always been interpreted by Pennsylvania courts to protect the right of all Pennsylvanians, not just militiamen, to possess firearms. Oklahoma's constitution, enacted in 1907, overtly protects the right to keep a gun at home, at the same time as subjecting the carrying of concealed weapons to regulation:â€Å"The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power, when thereunto legally summoned, shall never be prohibited; but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons. † http://www. law. ucla. edu/faculty/volokh/beararms/statecon/htm In recent years, numerous states have added gun ownership rights to their constitutions. For instance, Wisconsin amended its constitution so thatâ€Å"The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose. † http://www . law. ucla. edu/faculty/volokh/beararms/statecon/htm These state constitutional provisions would not protect gun owners from federal gun controls; however they protect gun owners against some state and local gun controls. The Second Amendment to the U. S. Constitution states: â€Å"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.† http://www. law. ucla. edu/faculty/volokh/beararms/statecon/htm In U. S. v. Cruikshank, a nineteenth-century case, the U. S. Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment was merely a protection against federal infringements of a right to bear arms. Although this decision predated the Supreme Court's 20th century decisions incorporating various Bill of Rights guarantees into the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause, with the outcome of guaranteeing those rights against violation by state and local governments, plus by the federal government.It is not a t all apparent that mid-nineteenth-century judges were unaware to any right to keep and bear arms. Consider this passage from the Supreme Court's infamous decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1856), in which the Supreme Court held that slaves and their descendants could claim no rights of citizenship. What is interesting from our viewpoint is the Court's understanding of what are the rights of citizenship. The Supreme Court pointed out that the framers could not have intended that slaves or their descendants ever be citizens because thatâ€Å"would give to persons of the Negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; an d it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State†. (Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U. S.393 (1856)) Yale Law School professor Akhil Amar argues that the right of individuals to be armed was very much the intention of the drafters and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment. After the Civil War, the southern states quickly passed â€Å"black codes† that clearly denied the newly freed slaves the right to keep and bear arms. The debates in Congress in the 1860s over the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment were laced with comments regarding the need to assure that the freed slaves not be kept disarmed and thus submissive, and that they be capable to enjoy the same right to keep and bear arms as white citizens. (Akhil Amar, 1998).The Supreme Court has rendered merely one Second Amendment decision in the twentieth century. In U. S. v. Miller (1939), the Court held that, in making it a crime to own an unregistered sawed-off shotgun, the NFA did not violate the Second Amendment. Gun rights advocates say that the precedential value of the case is just that people are not guaranteed access to gangster weapons, like sawed-off shotguns, and that by negative inference they do have a right to arm themselves with traditional personal firearms. Gun controllers argue that the Second Amendment does not guarantee anybody anything and that Miller means that there is no personal right to possess firearms in the U. S. Constitution.Focusing on the amendment's first clause, they argue that the amendment means only that Congress could not abolish the state militia, now the Nation al Guard. Gun rights advocates believe that the Second Amendment guarantees every law-abiding American adult a right to keep and bear personal firearms. â€Å"Implicit in the Bill of Rights, as in the entire structure of the Constitution, are the twin hallmarks of traditional liberal thought: trust in the people; and distrust in government. † (David Hardy, 1979). Some proponents of this interpretation stress that the right to keep and bear arms was intended to guarantee protection against government tyranny.Liberal constitutional law theorist, William Van Alstyne, finds an individual rights view of the Second Amendment in a textual reading of the amendment. He argues that the amendment â€Å"Speaks to sources of security within a free state, within which†¦ ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. ’† He explains that this language guarantees the individual's right to have arms for self-defense and self-preservation. (Willi am Van Alstyne, 1994). Harvard Law School Professor Lawrence Tribe, a person closely associated with liberal politics and the Democratic Party, as well concludes that â€Å"It is impossible to deny that some right to bear arms is among the rights of American citizens. † (Lawrence H. Tribe, 2000).Conceivably the Supreme Court will take a chance to interpret the Second Amendment in a recent Texas case. The U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas stated unconstitutional the federal law (18 U. S. C. sec. 922 [g][8]) which makes it a crime to own a firearm while under a restraining order for domestic violence as applied in a situation where the state divorce court, which issued the restraining order, had made no exclusive findings that the defendant posed a threat to his estranged wife. The district court held that the Second Amendment guarantees a personal right to keep and bear arms (U. S. v. Emerson, 46 F. Supp. 2d 598 [1999]). Two years later, the 5th Circuit C ourt of Appeals (Nov. 2001) affirmed, holding thatâ€Å"we find that the history of the Second Amendment reinforces the plain meaning of the text, namely that it protects individual Americans in their right to keep and bear arms whether or not they are members of a select militia or performing active military service or training. † Even though the U. S. Supreme Court eventually affirmed that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to keep and bear arms, which may never happen, the contrary belief is strongly rooted in U. S. and English history, in the constitutions of most U. S. states, as well as in a mountain of pro-gun scholarship. Many gun owners think that possession of firearms is a right of American citizenship and would not be persuaded otherwise, even by a U. S. Supreme Court decision to the contrary, just as death penalty opponents suppose that the Supreme Court was wrongheaded in declaring executions to be constitutionally permissible.Jeffrey Sn yder made the point aggressively in his 1993 Public Interest article, â€Å"A Nation of Cowards†: â€Å"The repeal of the Second Amendment would no more render the outlawing of firearms legitimate than the repeal of the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment would authorize the government to imprison and kill people at will. A government that abrogates any of the Bills Of Rights, with or without majoritarian approval, forever votes illegitimately, becomes tyrannical, and loses the moral right to govern†. References: Akhil Amar (1998). The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction (New Haven: Yale University Press). Clayton E. Cramer (1994).For the Defense of Themselves and the State: The Original Intent and Judicial Interpretation of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms; Praeger Publishers, 1994 David Hardy (1979). â€Å"The Second Amendment as a Restraint on State and Federal Firearms Restrictions,† in Restricting Handguns, ed. Don Kates (Great Barrington, Mass . : North River) Gordon S. Wood (1969). The Creation of the American Republic; Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press http://www. law. ucla. edu/faculty/volokh/beararms/statecon/htm Jeffrey Snyder (1993). Nation of Cowards; Public Interest article Lawrence H. Tribe (2000). American Constitutional Law, 3rd ed. (New York: Foundation) William Van Alstyne (1994). â€Å"The Second Amendment and the Personal Right to Arms,† Duke Law Journal 43

The foundations of environmentalism essays

The foundations of environmentalism essays FINAL ESSAY- THE FOUNDATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTALISM John Muir was one of the first preservationists. He strongly believed that the land as a whole should not be touched by man and that the worlds resources should not be greedily spent. He felt that it was his job to live the way that he felt god would. When he was a young man, he was blinded by an accident in the factory he was working in. After he made a miraculous recovery, he promised to himself that he would seek out the wilderness, and see the world as it should be. He founded the Sierra Club, an organization dedicated to preserving the wilderness. No dogma taught by the present civilization seems to form so insuperable an obstacle in a way of a right understanding of the relations which culture sustains as to wilderness, as that which declares that the world was made especially for the uses of men. Every animal, plant, and crystal controverts it in the plainest terms. Yet it is taught from century to century as something ever new and precious, and in the resulting darkness th e enormous conceit is allowed to go unchallenged. Gifford Pinchot was the only son of a rich New York family. His parents were regular guests at the White House, and his mother and father pushed him to be very successful. At the time, forestry as a career was unheard of, but his father pushed him to try new things, so he started studying forestry. He was the first to try selective logging, leaving the very young trees and the very old trees and taking the middle aged ones. He believed that one could still enjoy nature while using some of its resources, and that nature could be improved for the public good. World-wide practice of Conservation and the fair and continued access by all nations to the resources they need are the two indispensable foundations of continuous plenty and of permanent peace. Aldo Leopold, an ecologist, naturalist, and conservationist, was born i...

Colonies of the New World essays

Colonies of the New World essays The early colonies whether they were one of the Middle, New England, or Southern, they knew they needed a central government. The southern colonies had a certain way of handling their lives. Their way of life sometimes did not agree with the other colonies so they did things differently. They relied mostly on slave labor while the other colonies did not. Their economy was based on tobacco. The social structure went as follows The Southern Colonies were larger and more spread out than the other two colonies so they held county organizations rather than town meetings due to the distance. They had County judges and sheriffs who ran the local governments. That was the governmental difference between the southern colony and its Middle and New England counterparts. All three colonies had a royal governor, with an appointed council, and an elected assembly. This showed that the colonies often differed in their approach but in the end they always had the same beginning format. The economy of the Southern colonies consisted of plantations and various-sized farms that were widely separated and grew key staple crops. These plantations and farms were mostly operated using indentured servants or slaves. This colony had a one-crop economy that did well when the weather was favorable. But Mother Nature was not always kind to the settlers and when the conditions changed for the worse the colony suffered greatly. This meant that the Southern colonies were more dependent on England and the generosity of other colonies for manufactured goods and other food items. Tobacco, Rice, and Indigo were the main crops in selective states. Waterways provided the main form of transportation since there were many rivers in that area. While the Puritanism was rampant ion the New England Colonies, Anglicanism was the established Episcopal Church, though in Maryland there was a large minority of Catholics. Like the Middle colonies the Southern colonies pract ...

Climate change and H5N1 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Climate change and H5N1 - Essay Example This subtype virus was first discovered in 1960 in china. It was then discovered in Hong Kong as a direct transmission of the virus from birds to humans. Recent studies show that the wide spread statistics of the virus is reported over 60 countries in the world. Scientists have been on the look out to analyze whether the global climate change has any risk factors towards the widespread viral situation (Joan,138). Different studies have been reported towards the virus highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses H5N1. Through understanding the causes of the condition mode of spread, findings can be concluded towards the effects of climate change as a risk factor. A number of studies will be analyzed here. Different years will be analyzed also. Data for the different continent spread is analyzed here through the periods when the global climatic effects were felt. The disease influenza is caused by transmission of the virus from birds to humans. The predisposing risk factor is coming into contact with the virus. Research was done over the different continents from January 2004 to December 2009. Throughout this period, the epidemic waves are assessed. Global warming that has enhanced the mosquito transmitting the virus to thrive in different continents. These have been felt largely in the northern America as well as Europe. The excessive heat during the early summer period has seen a huge outbreak of the disease. The mosquito transmits the bird in turn it enters the human systems. The virus has been analyzed and seen to survive more effectively during the cold weather. This in turn leads to its wide spread during the winter and early summer. The global change in climate has cause a different trend in the movement of birds that carry the virus from Asia to other parts of the world. Their movement entails a longer stay in one place, lack of ordinary migration movement in time assessment, the length before stopping

Leisure law Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 1

Leisure law - Assignment Example It was actually in Donoghue v. Stevenson, in which the concept of duty of care was significantly and formally conceptualized and developed. Hereby the court of law established some concrete tests which ought to be satisfied so as to establish the duty of care. However, it was actually in Caparo Industries v. Dickman that happens to be a prominent British Tort Law case, in which a tripartite test for establishing the duty of care was set up (Cane 1996). Dickman happened to be the auditors of the accounts of the company Fidelity plc, while Caparo Industries happened to be a company that purchased the shares of Fidelity plc. After purchasing the shares of Fidelity plc, Caparo Industries found out that the accounts prepared by Dickman at no time indicated or showed that the firm has been running into large losses. It needs to be mentioned that before Donohue v. Stevenson, the claimants had to verify the existent duty clause to achieve success. In contrast, the subsequent cases tried to o rganize and limit the tests given by Donohue v. Stevenson. Caparo Industries v. Dickman was a step in that direction. The court established that in case of Caparo Industries v. Dickman, for the emergence of care to arise in the cases of negligence, the three essential criteria needed to be verified: There is no denying the fact that human relationships tend to thrive under the aegis of a large and wide range of situations and circumstances. Hence, the very establishment of duty of care in any particular case may give way to many confusions and variations. Traditionally speaking, the law has always tried to verify and establish the duty of care in a range of circumstances, each and every circumstance being incumbent to its own specific characteristics and peculiarities. However, this practice has lead to the creation of a whole body of