Comparing the New England and Chesapeake Colonists
The New England and Chesapeake colonists settled in the new world for different reasons like religious freedoms in the North and quick profits in the South.
Jamestown was originally an ideal place to strike it rich for the colonists. They didn't plan on staying long, therefore not bringing many women, as seen in Doc C. The early colony began to expand after the governors imposed laws and kept things running smooth. The Pilgrims who were seeking religious freedom from the Church of England established the Plymouth plantation in Massachusetts. The New England colonists brought more women because they planned on more of a permanent settlement; this is illustrated in the passenger list contained in Doc. B. They lived their lives for their god, not like the Chesapeake region, which was in it for the money.
The colonists in the Chesapeake region started to make a profit with Tobacco and Indigo. Both products had a market in Europe. Many farmers moved farther and farther out of the colony for more land. This way they could produce more products, which would ultimately lead to overproduction and a decline in the selling price. The geography to the north around Massachusetts was a lot different. The soil was not very good for farming, but there were a lot of forests and natural ports. These features made that area ideal for shipbuilding and fishing. So the northern colonies became a big shipbuilding industry. So the North's output ...
In the early stages of North American colonization by the English, the colony of Jamestown, Virginia was founded in 1607 (Mailer Handout 1 (6)). Soon after the Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded in 1629 (Mailer Handout 2 (1)). These two colonies, although close in the time they were founded, have many differences in aspects of their lives and the way they were settled. The colonies have a different religious system, economic system, political system, and they have a different way of doing things; whether that be pertaining to making money, practicing religion, or electing governors. Along with the differences, there are also a sameness between these two colonies. Each colony has been derived from England and has been founded by companies
The English Settlement in the New World was largely the result of the Age of Exploration. The English started emigrated to the New World around the early 1600s; they settles in regions including the New England and the Chesapeake region and by the 18th century these two regions had developed their own society. These two regions had developed different political, economic and social system in their regions. The political differences were due to who governs the colony. The economic differences were due to the motives of the settlement. The social differences were due to the people who settled there, while the New England emigrated as a family, the Chesapeake emigrated with mostly male.
Second, those who migrated to New England tended to come over as families, quite dissimilar to the single men who flooded Chesapeake Bay. Obviously, a much more stable family life took root in New England. Single women in Chesapeake Bay were few and far between, and the few that were around were not single for long. It was much easier to establish families in New England, where the balance between men and women was much closer to equal. These strong families provided security and made the New England colonists live a more stable life than those who lived to the south in Chesapeake Bay.
During the late 16th century and into the 17th century, European nations rapidly colonized the newly discovered Americas. England in particular sent out numerous groups to the eastern coast of North America to two regions. These two regions were known as the Chesapeake and the New England areas. Later, in the late 1700's, these two areas would bond to become one nation. Yet from the very beginnings, both had very separate and unique identities. These differences, though very numerous, spurred from one major factor: the very reason the settlers came to the New World. This affected the colonies in literally every way, including economically, socially, and politically.
The New England, Middle and Southern colonies were all English ruled, but yet very different. Among their distinctions, was the geography which played an important role in shaping these colonies. New England attracted Puritan farmers who wanted to separate from the Catholic Church. But because of the bone dry soil in the North, these colonists found they couldn't continue with their traditional ways of farming. However, with the immense amounts of water that surrounded them, they found that they could fish and trade. The Middle colonies on the other, hand had a moderate amount of everything. The fertile soil and the major seaports such as Philadelphia and New York, allowed these Middle colonists to make a living any way they saw fit. This led to the brisk development of the Middle Seaboard . Unlike the Middle and Northern colonies, the Southern colonies had large amounts of fertile land allowing for the development of large plantations. Because farming the plantations was the economic thrust for the South, towns and cities developed slowly. Thusly Geography greatly affected the lifestyles of these regions in the New World.
Levitt, S. D. (2004). Understanding why crime fell in the 1990s: Four factors that explain the
“Where have All the Criminals Gone” tries to construct the primary cause of a drop in crime rates recorded in the 1990s. The chapter considers various causes, but the authors are more inclined towards the assertion that abortion is the primary cause of a decline in crime rates during
However, chapters one and two differ. In chapter one, it focuses on the plummeting crime rates in the 90’s. Then goes on to explain the factors that caused this decrease. Some of the factors include a drop in unemployment due to economic factors, an increase in incarceration rates, a decrease on the demand of crack, and mandatory arrests. It also provides three steps people can take to prevent future
Why the decline in crime in the 1990s? Many plausible explanations have been reported (and given short shrift by the authors), including higher conviction rates and longer prison terms which are keeping repeat offenders off the streets, more police and better policing strategies, decline in the crack cocaine trade and higher expenditures in victim precautions like security guards, alarms, car theft devices, etc.
The national report will show an increase or decrease in crimes being reported by local police agencies. Uniform Crime Report is used in almost every state which allows the program to track various crime trends metropolitan areas. Depending on the crime and population the statistics will vary from state to state. Large U.S. cities have been chosen to compare the statistics on robbery and murder rates. “Bruce Alberts, chair of the National Research Council, urged participants to use the research knowledge contained in the reports in combination with the experience and wisdom gained from practice to suggest new approaches and interventions against the various manifestations of violence” (Skolnick, 1994 pg.2).
Even though there are many explanations as to why crime declined in the 1990s I feel scholars do not really know the real answers as to why. Every explanation that is mentioned could be a potential factor as to why crime declined, but no one really knows why crime declined in the 1990s. I do believe that the potential factors of hiring more officers and the increase of incarceration could be two big factors that really contributed to the decline of crime. As mentioned above, in the 1990’s it was decided to hire more officers, and when that occurred crime seemed to go down. The reason it went down was because now there was enough officers to cover many areas that before officers were not able to patrol because they were so limited on staff. Areas with the highest crime rates seemed to be in areas like New York but when more officers were hired, the rate went down. With the enforcement of more officers it was possible now to spread the officers in different areas, especially in hotspots where crimes seemed to occur the most. When there is a lack of police officers to patrol it is difficult to keep our community safe due to officers been on calls, and not been able to show visibility to prevent crime. Another factor I do believe had a lot to do with crime decreasing was the increased of incarceration because now that more officers were hired in, they were able to tackle down all the offenders and incarcerate them. Basically, in the 1990’s as soon as more officers were on the job, they put all the bad guys behind bar which could explain why crime went down. All the offenders were now locked up, and baby bloomers were all grown up to be committing
The Webster dictionary defines crimes as a serious offense against the public law, and statistics as a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, and interpretation of masses of numerical data (Merriam-Webster, 1999). Crimes statistic are vital to the Criminal Justice system for numerous reasons. Not only do law enforcement agencies use it as a tool to assign resources and plan their budgets, but it is vital in tracking the latest trends in criminal behavior. Crime statistics also aide criminologist and law enforcement agencies to predict crime, analyze crime, and even prevent crime. For this assignment we will be using the (FBI), Uniform Crime Reporting website and choose two cities and discuss various crime statistic for each city. The discussion will cover violent crime as well as property crime. We will discuss the demographic breakdown of both cities and draw conclusion as to what affect it
Crime within today’s society is recorded for analysis through criminological statistics. These statistics can be used for a number of reasons, some of which include, police performance assessment, the evaluation of crime prevention programs and crime trend forecasting (Morgan & Clare 2012, pp 25-52). However, due to substantial weaknesses in the methods in the way crime statistics are gathered it is highly likely that the data often does not represent the true rates of criminal activity emerging within each area (Morgan & Clare 2012, pp 25-52, Weatherburn, D 2001 pp 416-420). Thus, this research essay will explore the discrepancies and shortcomings of three common methods of gathering criminological statistics. These methods will include official
In order to understand the attitudes towards police work and the actions of police officers one can make use of the Structure-agency debate which has three distinct perspectives; structure, agency and structuration. This essay shall argue which position is best to apply by drawing on sociological theories and concepts.
In the article “Blowout! Firestone’s Image Restoration Campaign” Blaney, Benoit, and Brazeal (2002) discuss how Firestone failed in its recovery efforts. The authors claim that Firestone’s attempt to shift blame was “poorly conceived.” (p. 379) Also, they claim the use of celebrities to support their products and reputation was unsuccessful due to the obvious financial relationships between them. This discussion leads up to the application of Benoit’s image restoration theory. (2002). This theory states that “communicators who need to restore damaged reputations have five general rhetorical options: denial, evading responsibility, reducing offensiveness, corrective action, and mortification.” (p.380) The author’s conclude that this case study displays “denial and, sadly, concealment of incriminating data, are common responses to wrongful action. Had corrective action been implemented immediately, it seems likely that many deaths and injuries could have been avoided.” (p.388-389)