Jacques Cartier Essays - New France, 16th Century In Canada

Jacques Cartier Jacques Cartier was born in St. Malo (France) in 1491. Not much is known of his life before 1534, when he departed on his first voyage. He was looking for a passage through or around North America to East Asia, as some had done before him, and many would after him. Though he undoubtedly made a voyage to the New World prior to 1534, probably in Brazil. In 1534, he was given a grant by King Francis I of France to search for the north west passage. Cartier explored the coast of Newfoundland, but found no passage leading westward. He made the crossing of the Atlantic in only twenty days, and landed on an island near the coast of Newfoundland, by then already much frequented by Breton fisherman. He sailed north, and entered the Straight of Belle Isle. He sailed into and named the gulf of St. Lawrence, sailed along the westcoast of Newfoundland, and crossed the Bay to the Magdalen Islands and Prince Edward Island, both of which he thought were part of the mainland. Then he went to Chaleur Bay and Gaspe? peninsula which he claimed for the French crown. There he saw 50 canoes filled with Micmac indians, who seemed friendly and greeted him with the words napeu tondamen assurtah (we want to make friendship). The next day the French and the Micmac traded and celebrated. Cartier explored the bay, being disappointed that it was not the straight to China he had hoped it to be. He also met a fishing party of 200 Hurons, led by their chief, Donnaconna. His sons, Domagaia and Taignagny, went to France with Cartier to become interpreters. Cartier explored Anticosti Islands and returned to France. As he had heared of a large river further to the west, and hoped it to be the sought-for northeast passage, Cartier departed on a second voyage in the next year. He sailed through the Strait of Belle Isle again, but this time followed the coast westward, and reached the St. Lawrence. He sailed upriver until the Huron village of Stadacona (at the location of present-day Quebec). Donnacona first greeted him friendly and solemnly, but refused to let him sail further west. Three medicin men dressed up as devils, and warned Cartier not to go further, but Cartier just laughed at it. He went further upriver, leaving the two Huron boys behind. He reached Hochelaga, another Huron village. Again their coming resulted in extensive festivities. Cartier climbed a mountain he called Mount R'eal (royal mountain), and was appointing when he saw the Lachine Rapids a bit upriver, which told him that this was not the passage to China. He spent the winter in Stadacona. During the winter his men suffered from scurvy, less than ten of his 110 men remained strong enough, and had to get food and water for all. Because he was afraid that the indians would attack if they learned that the French were ill, Cartier ordered his men to make noise when they were near. The expedition might well not have survived if it were not for Domagaia. Domagaia had scurvy too, but ten days later Cartier saw him healthy and well. Domagaia told him he had cured from the bark and needles of the white cedar tree. Just over one week later the tree was bare, but all Cartier's men were healthy again. The Hurons told him stories about a land in the north, called Saguenay, full of gold and other treasure. None of this was true of course, but the Hurons liked telling stories, and when they found the French liked stories of riches, they were happy to give them these. Willing to let king Francis I to hear about these stories, Cartier kidnapped Donnaconna and his sons, and took them with him to France. He wanted to make another expedition, this time to look for Saguenay, but because of a war with Spain, and the difficulties of preparing the voyage, he was not able to do so until 1541. This time Cartier would not be the sole leader of the expedition, but had to serve under Jean-Francois de la Rocque, sieur de Robervalas viceroy and commander in chief. He visited Stadacona, and built a fort near the mouth of the Saguenay. His men collected what they thought were diamonds and gold, but in reality were only quartz and iron pyrite (fool's gold). Cartier himself went west, looking for Saguenay, but got no further than Hochelaga. Back at his fort (called Charlesbourg-Royal) he spent

A Definition of the Nguni Word Ubuntu

A Definition of the Nguni Word Ubuntu Ubuntu is a complex word from the Nguni language with several definitions, all of them difficult to translate into English. At the heart of each definition, though, is the connectedness that exists or should exist between people. Ubuntu is best known outside of Africa as a humanist philosophy associated with Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu. Curiosity about the name may also come from it being used for the open source operating system called Ubuntu. Meanings of Ubuntu One meaning of Ubuntu is correct behavior, but correct in this sense is defined by a persons relations with other people. Ubuntu refers to behaving well towards others or acting in ways that benefit the community. Such acts could be as simple as helping a stranger in need, or much more complex ways of relating with others. A person who behaves in these ways has ubuntu. He or she is a full person. For some, Ubuntu is something akin to a soul force - an actual metaphysical connection shared between people and which helps us connect to each other. Ubuntu will push one toward selfless acts. There are related words in many sub-Saharan African cultures and languages, and the word Ubuntu is now widely known and used outside of South Africa. Philosophy of Ubuntu During the era of decolonization, ubuntu was increasingly described as an African, humanist philosophy,  Ubuntu in this sense is a way of thinking about what it means to be human, and how we, as humans, should behave towards others. Archbishop Desmond Tutu famously described ubuntu as meaning My humanity is caught up, is inextricably bound up, in what is yours.1 In the 1960s and early 70s, several intellectuals and nationalists referred to ubuntu when they argued that an Africanization of politics and society would mean a greater sense of communalism and socialism. Ubuntu and the End of Apartheid In the 1990s, people began to describe Ubuntu increasingly in terms of the Nguni proverb translated as a person is a person through other persons.2 Christian Gade has speculated that the sense of connectedness appealed to South Africans as they turned away from the separation of Apartheid. Ubuntu also referred to the need for forgiveness and reconciliation rather than vengeance. It was an underlying concept in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the writings of Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu raised awareness of the term outside of Africa. President Barack Obama included mention of Ubuntu in his memorial to Nelson Mandela, saying it was a concept that Mandela embodied and taught to millions. Endnotes 1 Desmond Tutu: A Personal Overview of South Africas Truth and Reconciliation Commission No Future Without Forgiveness,  Ã‚ © 2000.2 Christian B.N. Gade, What is Ubuntu? Different Interpretations among South Africans of African Descent. South African Journal Of Philosophy 31, no. 3 (August 2012), 487. Sources Metz, Thaddeus, and Joseph B. R. Gaie. The African ethic of Ubuntu/Botho: implications for research on morality. Journal Of Moral Education 39, no. 3 (September 2010): 273-290. This article expands upon the definition of Ubuntu published by Alistair Boddy-Evans

Paralegal Duties and Case Scenarios Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Paralegal Duties and Case Scenarios - Essay Example In here, there is relationship called attorney-client relationship. A client-witness is one who has an existing attorney-client relationship with the hired attorney. The client is at the same time a witness or involved in a controversy and the hired attorney is the counsel. A non-client witness may refer to someone who may provide information to an attorney but no attorney-client relationship exists. The importance of an attorney-client relationship during an interview is that any information to be given by the client-witness is covered under the privileged communication rule. The privileged communication rule is a rule on evidence which provides that any information given by the client-witness to the attorney is kept confidential and cannot be divulged by the attorney without permission from the client-witness. On the other hand, the privilege is not applicable on the information gathered from or provided by a non-client witness since there is the absence of attorney-client relationship. The differences between interviewing a client-witness and a non-client witness are based on the fact that the existence or absence of the attorney-client relationship will define what level of participation the witnesses will give to the interviewer. A client-witness is expected to be participative in giving information while the non-client witness may have hesitance or may not give any information at all. As such, different plans and techniques must be provided for each of these kinds of interviewees. In the interview for a client-witness for example, the subject should do most of the talking with less interruptions by the interviewee. The purpose of the interview is to gather as much information that will help the interviewee generate relevant and useful ideas for the controversy. Questions are reserved for the latter part of the interview so as to preserve the continuity of the interviewee's statements. If there are questions that need to be clarified, the attorney can always call the client-witness anytime. On the other hand, interviewing a non-client witness entails selection of questions to be answered by the interviewee. Since most of the times the interviewee is non-participative, the interviewer should initiate the interview by asking questions. Usually, the purpose of the interview is to get an admission or confession or statements which can be admissible evidences so questions should be relevant. If the questions relate to the interviewee's participation in a controversy before a court, the interviewee should be reminded of his or her Miranda rights to make the statements or answers admissible in court proceedings. Case 2 The National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA) on its research concluded that the privilege communication rule on attorney-client relationship and the ethical standards for attorneys also apply to paralegals. And under the NFPA own rules, code of ethics, and professional responsibility, paralegals are expected to avoid conflicts of interest in handling cases. Conflict of interest may arise when a paralegal will work both for the conflicting parties in a controversy. Under ethical considerations, a paralegal should refuse to accept a client whom he knows to be an adversary to a case he currently holds or previously held. He should not also desire to get

Reimbursement requirements for billing purposes in the USA healthcare Essay

Reimbursement requirements for billing purposes in the USA healthcare system - Essay Example There are two types of insurance service providers; private and government. Private insurance is a form of business just as any other and therefore exist primarily to make profit. They therefore develop service bouquets that protect their primary interests of profitability. Government insurers on the other hand obtain their funding from the taxpayers and therefore operate with the sole objective of providing affordable medical insurance to the appropriate citizens. Government therefore provides insurance services to its employees known as civil servants and the poor in the society most of whom cannot afford the cost of private insurance. In both cases, the insured remit a monthly contribution to the service provider for the insurance coverage. On those considered the poor by the government, they remit a small amount of money set by the government, which the government supplements with money from the treasury. This way, everyone affords high quality medical services. Medical insurance services differ in terms of the cover specifications. A feature more prevalent in private insurance government insurers provides uniform services to those it considers unable to afford private services. However, it allows the civil servants to choose from the different service bouquets it outlines on its coverage. The different cover specifications vary in the monthly or annual remittance. The private insurers have dynamic medical services ensuring that they cover any form of medical condition; the more expensive the service is the more comprehensive its specifications become. Additionally, the quality of the services differs depending on both the service providers and the type of service package. Private insurers just as explained are business entities; they therefore survive based on the nature of their interaction with their customer base. Such service providers therefore offer quality services as a marketing strategy. With a medical insurance cover, one is assured of high quali ty medical services in case of a condition. However, the insurance service providers regulate the amount of money that one receives for the coverage depending on the service package. Both thee government and the private insurers have a clear demarcation for every service type therefore offer financial coverage up to the level that the service type allows (Green & Rowell, 2013). The government sets the minimal insurance services that everyone in the country should have in a bid to ensure that everyone in the country lives a high quality life. Among the most basic coverage, include accidents and recurrent diseases such as tuberculosis among others. By protecting the citizens from such diseases as cancer, among other recurrent diseases, the government ensures that everyone lives a higher quality and longer lives. The medical insurance services cover both inpatient and outpatient medical services depending on the nature of the insurance cover. The service provider explains the types of services included in the service specification thereby allowing for financial remittance accordingly. The insurance service providers deal with the medical institutions often eliminating the customer in their relations. In this case, after accessing medical services, the medical service provider consults the insurer with the patient details. The insurer receives the claim and

Moral And Ethical Issues Of Human Cloning Philosophy Essay

Moral And Ethical Issues Of Human Cloning Philosophy Essay Cloning is rapidly emerging as one of the most controversial and emotion-laden of topics in todays world. To clone or not to clone: that is the million-dollar question. The prospect of cloning humans is highly controversial and raises a number of ethical, legal and social challenges that need to be considered. So, is it right or is it wrong? Can we not overlook this aspect since there are many advantages to it? But then again, a line has to be drawn somewhere, does it not? Before going into the controversial debate over cloning, a concrete, dictionary definition of what a clone is, must be given in order to prevent any confusion that may occur later on. A clone is defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary as the aggregate of the asexually produced progeny of an individual as well as an individual grown from a single somatic cell of its parent and genetically identical to it. To put it in simpler words, it is an asexually reproduced offspring who has the same genetic information as anothe r organism or organisms. With that said, A matter of much debate in current society is whether human cloning should be allowed so that infertile couples could have the opportunity to have genetically related children, give people the chance of life after death, and open the way for perfect match organ transplants, or should it be banned because it involves the waste and destruction of human embryos, could lead to unfair treatment of cloned individuals and their original, and it may lead to a designer society. A 1997 CNN poll conducted among 1,005 American adults found that 69% are scared of the possibility of cloning humans (Poll). Why is this? This fear of the unknown has always excited the human race, from the Marina trench to the outer limits of space, we as humans have always strived to increase our scientific and technological knowledge. In order to over come the fear of the dark we must shine light on the unknown. Many Americans feel very strongly one way or the other on the issue of human cloning, thr ough this paper we will research and discuss where each of these sides are coming from, exploring the ethical, moral, and logical aspects of both pro and anti- cloning concerns. Jeff Sessions, junior United States Senator from Alabama has stated, We, in this country, have believed by a substantial majority that cloning human beings is not right and should not be done. We certainly have all seen the rejections of Nazi Germanys abuses of science. As a society and a nation, there ought to be some limit on what we can allow or should allow(Brainy Quotes). This statement in its self, makes are minds race to the internal sacred parts of our bodys, it make us ask the personal question, is human cloning ethical, does it truly meet our own standards of right vs. wrong? On one side of the debate are those who are against human cloning. These people feel that cloning could very possibly do more damage than good. First of all, in the beginning stages of cloning it will take many years to perfect it. It took at least 208 attempts, which means embryos, to succeed in cloning Dolly, the first mammal to be cloned (Gibbs 52). It is suspected that it will take even more attemp ts to successfully clone a human being. Presently, in the cloning of mammals, 98% of cloned embryos do not implant, or die off during gestation or shortly after birth (Gibbs 52). Also, those who are against cloning respond to the argument that cloning allows for bringing the dead back to life, that a clone will not have the same personality that the original person had. This is due to the fact that much of personality is determined by nurture and environment, not genes. So, they believe that if someone clones a person in hopes of having them be exactly like the original person, the clone will end up being treated unfairly and have unrealistic expectations set upon them. Thirdly, as for clones providing a perfect organ and blood match, those against cloning are afraid that clones may be produced only for the reason to take their organs or blood. This means that the clones would not be treated as a real person, if they are alive at all, assuming they are not created for use of their h earts or other vital organs. Also, anti-cloning people feel that it is possible that society could become homogeneous because only the best and most talented people would be cloned and therefore, society would lose all of its diversity (What Would a Human Clone Be Like). On the opposing side many pro cloning activist believe cloning great individuals with exemplary talents, genius, or character can be reproduced. Another Einstein, Mozart or Michael Jordan could benefit our society. They could teach us and help us teach our children, thus creating a stronger and healthier society  Ã‚  (Human cloning). Biologist hope that endangered species could be saved. They hope that through the research and perfection of the technology to clone mammals, preservation of endangered species will become available. Many other individual supports believe that with cloning, infertile couples could have children. Despite getting a fair amount of publicity in the news current treatments for infertility, in terms of percentages, are not very successful. One estimate is that current infertility treatments are less than 10% successful. Couples go through physically and emotionally painful procedures for a small chance of having children. Many couples run out of time and money without successfully having children (Human cloning). So a simple question to ask, how do the scientist themselves feel about the ethics behind cloning? The scientists of the Missiplicity Project (Missy, the first dog to be cloned in history, following Dolly the sheep. The project started with the wish of Missys owners to have her reproduced) answer to the question on ethics by saying that since they do believe in ethics, they developed their own Code of Bioethics. This code sets out guidelines regarding issues such as ethical treatment of the animals as well as the effort to minimize the waste of viable embryos or the destruction of flawed embryos. The scientists believe that cloning is definitely a new form of assisted reproduction, just as artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization were new and criticized as ungodly in their day. People have very different views of what is natural. Embryo cloning still depends on a human egg from a woman and sperm from a man. Human embryo cloning just tweaks apart a zygote at the two-cell stage, changing a single two-cell form of life into two one-cell forms of life. One can argue that God did not intend cloning to be done. But the same argument was used, largely in the past, to oppose such techniques as in vitro fertilization. It all depends upon what one is used to, and what one considers being natural(Jesse Rainbow). Some claim that cloned humans may be born without souls. They speculate that the soul enters the body when a sperm fertilizes an ovum. Since there is no sperm involved in cloning, perhaps the fetus would develop without a soul. There is no way to know whether a soul is present; it has no weight, it cannot be seen, touched, smelled, heard, or detected in any other way. In fact, many people believe that souls do not exist. Speculation on this topic can never be resolved. The final moral question raised by cloning is this: who is to be held responsible for taking care of this new life? The person whose genetic material is being used could easily be separate from the clone and claim no responsibility, as does a sperm donor. The person involved in giving birth to the child could also claim no responsibility since she is merely a surrogate. Human cloning is dangerous to society. The moral implications and the psychological ramifications toward clones and their progenitors only add to the urgency for many to want to permanently ban cloning. Many who picture cloning as immoral imagine a person cloning him or herself so that the clone could be robbed for a needed organ. This argument is irrelevant; one has to separate possible abuses of a technology from the debate over whether a technology is moral. Quantum physics is not immoral because it has been used to design nuclear weapons. The Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II made a recent statement against cloning of all life forms. The Vatican issued statement specifically condemning the cloning of humans but has not come out officially against cloning of other animals.   If God had wanted us to clone ourselves, he would have given us a way for a-sexual reproduction. But because we were made to reproduce bi-sexually, this is the only way we should continue to do so.   However, in contrast to the opinions of their peers, some Jewish and Muslim religious leaders testified before the National Bioethics Advisory Commission that they feel that embryo and cloning research might provide discoveries that would lead to an appropriate way to counter infertility (Jesse Rainbow). On August 29th 2000 Pope John Paul II addressed the International Congress on Transplants. He commented that medical methods that fail to respect the dignity and value of the person must always be avoided. I am thinking in particular of attempts a t human cloning with a view to obtaining organs for transplants: these techniques, insofar as they involve the manipulation and destruction of human embryos, are not morally acceptable, even when their proposed goal is good in itself (Pope Paul II). On the same note, scientists are attempting to create transgenic pigs, which have human genes. Their heart, liver or kidneys might be useable as organ transplants in humans. This would save many lives. Thousands of people die each year waiting for available human organs if this is achieved, transgenic animals could be cloned to produce as many organs as are needed (Cloning Debate). A thought we as humans must explore is can we live with ourselves if we set ideal while men, women and children are dieing all over the world from dieses. Dont we have a moral and ethical obligation to not just our county but to our selves to strive and find not just answers, but antidotes to diseases such as cancer, Parkinsons, and Alzheimer? How do you feel about it, does the end really justify the means? So with so much debate and so much controversy, what could possible cause a human to want to clone another living life? Where is the logic behind all this madness, is trying to clone mammals a logical idea? Scientists hope that one day therapeutic cloning can be used to generate tissues and organs for transplants. So that it may some day be used in humans to produce whole organs from single cells or to produce healthy cells that can replace damaged cells in degenerative diseases such as Alzheimers or Parkinsons. To do this, DNA would be extracted from the person in need of a transplant and inserted into an enucleated egg. After the egg containing the patients DNA starts to divide, embryonic stem cells that can be transformed into any type of tissue would be harvested. The stem cells would be used to generate an organ or tissue that is a genetic match to the recipient. In theory, the cloned organ could then be transplanted into the patient without the risk of tissue rejection. If organs could be generated from cloned human embryos, the need for organ donation could be significantly reduced (Cloning Fact Sheet). The British Organ Donor Society (BODY) supports cloning efforts to relieve the strain of the lack of organs that are available. Cloning technology is expected to aid the result in several medical breakthroughs.   It is thought that there may one day be a cure for cancer.   This is because the cloning process helps us understand the process of cell differentiation. Theories exist that if a cure for cancer can be found, then further testing may lead to a cure for heart attacks and cloning organs for organ transplantation. Scientists believe that they may be able to treat heart attack victims by cloning their healthy heart cells and injecting them into the areas of the heart that have been damaged.   The cloning of organs would eliminate individuals waiting on a list for an organ transplant.   Skin for burn victims, brain cells for the brain damaged, spinal cord cells for quadriplegics and paraplegics, hearts, lungs, livers, and kidneys could be produced. By combining this techn ology with human cloning technology it may be possible to produce needed tissue for suffering people that will be free of rejection by their immune systems (Human Cloning). Biotechnology company Advanced Cell Technology Inc. (ACT), based in Worcester, Massachusetts, said the human cloning breakthrough was aimed not at creating a human being but at mining the embryo for stem cells to treat diseases ranging from Parkinsons to juvenile diabetes. Michael West, chief executive officer of ACT hopes to further treatment of ailments such as diabetes, cancer, AIDS, Parkinson s and Alzheimers disease . Megan Regan wrote to the Human Cloning Foundation for not help, but awareness. This is an exert from her plead to inform even persuade those against cloning I, too, was at first against cloning as I didnt like the idea of playing God. However, ten years ago I developed endolymphatic hydrops, which is an autoimmune disease of the middle ear. Since then Ive lost my hearing, developed balance problems and dizziness and there is no cure. As such I had to give up my job, which I loved; but worse was yet to come. I began getting bad headaches, blurred vision and pressure in my brain. I was then diagnosed with Arnold Chari malformation. Ive since had neurosurgery twice. Its helped but not cured the problem. Also I have osteoarthritis of the cervical spine, which likewise cannot be cured. So, to stem cell research, cloning and DNA manipulation, I say bring it on so people who, like me and in other cases worse off than me, would benefit from it. I dont want to live forever and become a superhuman through this technology. However, I believe I, and so do others, deserve a better quality of life. Might I add that healthy people who are against cloning would no doubt change their minds if placed in my position or in other peoples positions who see the great need of this technology (Hope). Still how logical is it? Reproductive cloning is expensive and highly inefficient. More than 90% of cloning attempts fail to produce viable offspring. More than a hundred nuclear transfer procedures could be required to produce one viable clone. In addition to low success rates, cloned animals tend to have more compromised immune function and higher rates of infection, tumor growth, and other disorders. Japanese studies have shown that cloned mice live in poor health and die early. About a third of the cloned calves born alive have died young, and many of them were abnormally large. Many cloned animals have not lived long enough to generate good data about how clones age. Appearing healthy at a young age unfortunately is not a good indicator of long-term survival. Clones have been known to die mysteriously. For example, Australias first cloned sheep appeared healthy and energetic on the day she died, and the results from her autopsy failed to determine a cause of death (Cloning Fact Sheet). Cloning may be good and it may be bad. Probably its a bit of both. The question must not be greeted with reflex hysteria but decided quietly, soberly and on its own merits. We need less emotion and more thought (Richard Dawkins is an eminent Brithish ethologist, evolutionary theorist, and popular science writer who holds the Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University). Due to the inefficiency of animal cloning (only about 1 or 2 viable offspring for every hundred experiments) and the lack of understanding about reproductive cloning, many scientists and physicians strongly believe that it would be unethical to attempt to clone humans. Not only do most attempts to clone mammals fail, about 30% of clones born alive are affected with large offspring syndrome and other debilitating conditions. Several cloned animals have died prematurely from infections and other complications. The same problems would be expected in human cloning. In addition, scient ists do not know how cloning could impact mental development. While factors such as intellect and mood may not be as important for a cow or a mouse, they are crucial for the development of healthy humans. With so many unknowns concerning reproductive cloning, the attempt to clone humans at this time is considered potentially dangerous. Cloning is definitely a sensitive issue that must be handled very carefully. Although cloning of animals has already been done, the human race may not yet be ready for the cloning of humans, regardless of the matter that it has already been done or not. There is no doubt in my mind that cloning has great advantages to it, but with it comes the fear that many lines may be crossed which should not be crossed. Scientists may believe that ethics may cease scientific development but with care and regard for ethics that are also within reason, I believe that this development will not be ceased. We have explored some of the major pro and cons in the controversial issue of cloning; from the ethical, morality and logic stand points we beginning to understand the sensitivity and grave importance of this topic. Now to say cloning is right or wrong is a personal decision. One that I hope I have shed light upon so that you might explore more the cause and effects of cloning the human race.

Police Authority vs Individual Rights Essay -- Law Enforcement

It is easy for police to get caught up in the idea that it is them against the rest of society (Barkan, 2012). Many citizens in today’s democratic society have a negative or fearful view of our law enforcement. Think back to grade school, who was that one kid in class that everyone was annoyed by or despised? Most people would answer the teacher’s pet or the tattletale. We have grown up from a young age to have a negative view towards those that get us into trouble when we think we can get away with something we know is wrong. In the adult world, the police force can equate to those tattletales. The overall basis for a democratic society is freedom. We stress that freedom allows us to be individualistic. Herbert L. Packer, a law professor, charted out two ideas in our criminal justice system. The idea or crime control and due process are ideally two separate entities, but have been found in our criminal justice system to overlap (Barkan, 2012). Due to the fact that these two ideas overlap, causes tension within our democratic society. These ideas cause there to be a double edge sword. As stated in our textbook, â€Å"the more crime control we want, the less due process we have; the more due process we have, the less crime control we can expect.† (Barkan, 2012). Ideally, we would like to live in a society where everyone is treated equally regardless of race, gender, social class, etc. However, police have the difficult task of making sure arrests are made unbiased. While on the job, police must put all their personal opinions aside. They must provide everyone with an equal and fair chance. It is important in a democratic society for police to not know too much about the community they are policing. It allows them to ... ... a distinction between the two in a society where individual freedoms are so highly valued. Is that not what the framers of the Constitution based the future of our nation on? The real question is, how far are police allowed to go when the blurry line of individual freedoms and public safety is in question? Everyday our law enforcement is faced with the same task, to follow the law and enforce it, while allowing society to maintain their individual freedoms and liberties that this country is founded upon. Works Cited Barkan, Steven E. Criminology: A Sociological Understanding. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 2012. Print. Crew, B. Keith. â€Å"Sex differences in criminal sentencing: Chivalry or patriarchy?† Justice Quarterly (Mar. 1991): n. pag. Print. Marx, Gary T. â€Å"Police & Democracy.† The Encyclopedia of Democracy. N.p., 1995. Web. 7 Dec. 2011.

Different between leader and manager

LEADER.From the root word itself, a leader is basically someone who leads or guides and is in charge or in command of others. (www. thefreedictionary. com, 2007) But not every one is a born leader. Leadership to some is innate and to others, a skill.. And certain leaders have different characteristics but same basic roles. In essence, there are nine roles for a leader. First, a leader must take the role of a sage. He constantly develops wisdom through continuous gain of knowledge about wide-range subjects and designs a strategy by being mindful of considerations and consequences.He must also be open to find the best path for the organization. Second role that the leader must play is that of a visionary. A visionary-leader must know how to turn seemingly impossible dreams into reality by innovating powerful ideas and articulating it to the members so that the whole group would act. A leader should be a magician. Magician in a sense that he should be able to reform things without wasti ng too much effort and coordinates change by maintaining equilibrium among the structures, systems and procedures of the old system into a new one.Also, he should be able to maintain calmness despite a transition’s instability. The fourth role is that of a globalist. The leader should promote the organization’s accomplishment in leveraging the diversity of its workforce to ensue its global activities. The leader should also be able find the common ground on which the workforce can productively function. Next role is being a mentor. The leader should be committed to personal and professional development and can help his workforce to advance their careers through several learning opportunities and is devoted to the individuality of each member of the group.The leader should also serves as a motivator by generating an environment for people to find their inner drive. Then, the leader should also be an ally which builds partnerships to come up with an effective and mutuall y beneficial collaboration. The leader must also be a team player. He must also be willing to extend his trust to others. Then, the leader should also be sovereign. He should always be mindful in the use of power and is clever enough to take risks and face uncertainty. He should be responsible enough to take liabilities for the organization. He should be reliable in honoring obligations.The leader must also be a guide. He must be a flexible organizer and focused. The leader makes the journey towards the goal worthwhile. He should be able to use his expertise to accomplish the work and support the efforts of others. The last role of a leader is being an artisan. The workforce should see the leader’s devotion to master his craft and is always pursuing excellence through balanced aesthetic with practical standards. The leader should also be able to sustain attention to detail and is always pushing the creative juices of every one. (theleadingedge. com, 2007)Style is the method a nd approach of presenting direction, plan implementation and motivating people. (Clark, 2005) In the manner of leadership, there are basically three styles. First is the authoritarian or autocratic style. In this style, the leader has absolute power over the team. The workforce has little opportunity to make suggestions even though it is for the best interest of the organization. This style is best employed for routine or unskilled jobs. Second is the bureaucratic style wherein it works â€Å"by the books† to ensure that the work is done properly.This is usually used in works involving serious safety risks or big corporate deals. The last is the democratic style. The leader is open to the suggestion of the members in the decision-making process but in the end, the final decision still relies on the leader. MANAGER. He is someone who manages or controls resources and expenditures. (eLook. org, 2007) Managers play a significant role in administering the performance of their org anization. First, he is involved in the decision-making process of the organization.This role involves planning out strategies to solve or improve the quality of the wok force and the product. The manager should also be concerned in setting, planning and organizing the goal of the organization. To achieve short and long term goals, the manager should communicate the vision of the organization to the whole members. As the manager, he should also be able to guide and give directions so that the group can efficiently perform. Also, he should also empower the team because the performance of the organization greatly depends on how you motivate them.As a manager, you should also be able to effectively communicate with your subordinates to maintain the rapport in the organization. Another role is to evaluate and analyze a process that may give the best performance for the organization. Also, the manager should provide fulfillment amongst everyone. Lastly, the manager must be an excellent r ole model to the whole organization. The manager must always set a high standard not just for the group but for him as well and should be able to accomplish it. The manager must set as an example of being accountable for his and the group’s performance.(about-personal-growth. com, 2007) There are two main styles of management. These are autocratic and permissive. In the autocratic style, the manager makes all the decision unilaterally while in the permissive style, the manager allows the subordinates in the decision-making and gives them a substantial degree of autonomy in the work activities. (www. rpi. edu, 2007) One example of a good leader is Margaret Thatcher. She was responsible for setting in motion a series of interrelated events that gave a revolutionary twist to the century.She also helped the world mark the end of the millennium with hope and buoyancy. She became powerful person to many transformations that the world has seen. (Jonhson, 2003) On the other hand, the re are many great managers that do not make it in print. But, there are ways to become a great manager. The best managers are those who have an enthusiasm for continuous learning and are willing to work for their self improvement. (Hill, August 2003) A good manager is also someone who is both a team player and is concerned for others. Leaders and managers are almost synonymous but we there are still some differences.In a reality, the context of a leader is someone that is etched in our minds as someone heroes or patriotic. Whereas, we see managers as someone fitted in the corporate world. They are seldom associated with greatness or patriotism. In the corporate world, we also seldom hear about great managers a s great leaders. The difference between manager (or management) is that they are two sides of the same coin. In being one, they perceive each other whilst being diverse and different; they are parts of the whole with vital contrasts and in those very same contrasts, they make each other clear. (Garner, 2005)