Tom is running full speed, maybe even for his life. It is a perfect summer night in San Jose, and Tom and his work partner just left work minutes before. They were walking through a “bad neighborhood” when some thugs started hassling them, and yelling obscenities at them. Tom and his friend walked by them quickly soon to be chased by the thugs. The thugs were threatening Tom and his friend’s life. Tom and his friend continue to run till the reach a busy intersection where Tom pulls out a semi-automatic handgun from his backpack and points it towards the thugs. As soon as the gun is leveled the thugs retreat leaving the two men alone. If there had been no gun Tom and his friend would have been seriously beaten or even killed. Tom did not have a permit for the gun, and might have not been able to get one without a special reason (Rauch 731). People like Tom need to be able to get gun permits, but it is so difficult because of all the criminal activity in America. Gun control laws are pointless and are only binding on the law-abiding citizens.
The “waiting period” method of gun control is basically a two-step process. The first step in the procedure is that the person wanting a gun goes to the gun shop to buy a gun. Then, he/she must wait one to two weeks while the government performs a small background check for past criminal activities, disorderly conduct, or lack of mental/emotional stability. During this time, if the purchaser of the gun wanted the gun for a “quick crime” it is hoped that they will not still want to cause bodily harm after a few weeks of waiting around. Another dumb law is that is in effect in California is that if you want to carry a concealed handgun, “you have to prove that you have some special reason to carry”(Rauch 731).
The problem with this method of gun control is that it stops the ordinary citizen from purchasing a gun quickly. It still does not stop criminals from buying guns. They purchase them through "dummy buyers" that have clean backgrounds. So when the criminal enters the law abiding citizens house with deadly intentions, the innocent victim can’t defend his family cause he can’t get a gun cause he was arrested for drinking and driving 10 years ago before he was even married, so therefore him and his family become victims.
Rape is a virus that infects every nation, culture and society. It is constantly referred to as “the unfinished murder”, because of the deep state of despair the rapist leaves the victim in. There is no common identifiable trend that determines who will be a rape victim. Women are not assaulted because of their attitudes or actions, they are attacked simply because they are present. With rapists, just as with their victims, there is no identifiable trend. The old myth that only “sick, dirty, old, perverted men” commit rapes is a lie that society tells itself in order to sleep better at night. The startling truth is that most rapists work under a veil of normalcy. In order for the percentage of rapes to decrease, we have to change our ideas about rape and let go of the old myths of the past. And until this happens, rape will continue to plague our world at large.
Gun control has stirred an incredible amount heated debates and controversy in this country. Both sides believe that their view is the correct view. The question remains: Will controlling firearms result in less firearm deaths? The answer to that question is no. This is both proven and obvious. First is the point that criminals have never and will never obey the law, which is why they are criminals. The United Kingdom has an incredibly strict gun control policy but yet their murders involving a knife or other sharp edged weapons has a dramatic increase compared to our own. The second point is that there is already gun control implemented in many places, so gun control can easily be studied. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence studies and ranks all 50 states from the most strict to the most lenient. When comparing this with the FBI database of crime reports it will show that the strictest gun law states have the highest rate of firearm related murders than the state that is much more lenient. These two points come together to show that gun control will not work and is impractical.
The second amendment of the constitution states that “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 infringed”. In my opinion, this means that people have the right to own guns to form a militia to protect the nation or to be used in self-defense against a criminal. Furthermore, denying the public access to firearms for protection will only result in more crime, because the only real deterrent to criminal activity is encountering an armed victim that is ready to defend himself. I am opposed to any form of gun control because laws prohibiting the sale of firearms does not protect the general public and restrict liberty.
Through out the history of the United States, most, if not all households owned a gun. Used for protection, hunting, hobbies etc. In the second amendment it guaranteed the right to bear arms. The amendment states, “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 infringed”. The liberals are trying to amend the constitution in whatever way. Either stop the sales of firearms or restrict the sales so much that minimal amount of people can buy them. Most studies show that controlling firearms have not stop people from committing crimes.
The bullet, a small metal rounded cylinder with a egg-shaped tip, is fired from a firearm. Travelling at top speeds of 460 meters per second from a handgun (The Physics Factbook), it can instantly kill a man. That man might be some innocent victim on his way home from work to his wife and three kids. However, this victim caught in the crossfire could be a burglarer, con artist, organized crime member, rapist, or even a murderer. Crime nowadays has increased in both frequency as well as level of threat to the public. The only thing standing in crime’s way is the firearm that can stop a burglary, a rape, or even another murder. Unfortunately, recent gun bans and magazine limitations are threatening American’s rights to own firearms. These restrictions are evident across the country, especially in the state of New York. One example of these bans is Governor Andrew Cuomo’s recent limitations on high capacity magazines and the broadening definition of assault rifles in New York State. Although these recent gun bans in New York State have spread to other states, such as California and Colorado, the attempts to control gun violence are targeting the law-abiding, gun-owning citizens rather than the convicted felons or the mentally ill, who are usually the assailants in the shooting massacres around the country.
The American Dream can obliterate any prospect of satisfaction and does not show its own unfeasibility. The American dream is combine and intensely implanted in every structure of American life. During the previous years, a very significant number of immigrants had crossed the frontier of the United States of America to hunt the most useful thing in life, the dream, which every American human being thinks about the American dream. Many of those immigrants sacrificed their employments, their associations and connections, their educational levels, and their languages at their homelands to start their new life in America and prosper in reaching their dream.
Gun control only takes guns away from law-abiding people and it does nothing to stop criminals from buying illegal guns, who are unlikely to obey the law and register their guns at all. Most of the time the term gun control is improperly used. The definition of gun control is the government regulation of possession and use of firearms by private citizens. The government is using it as way to take our right to bear arms away from us.
Often times, a college board and society will lay blame on victims of sexual assault, inherently accepting male sexual violence as innate and natural. This is otherwise known as rape culture. Rape Culture is more broadly defined as a complex set of beliefs that reassure and naturalize male acts of sexual aggression, and consequently supporting violence against women. Sexual violence against women, even men, can be attributed to varying factors. However, the traditional response is to claim that men are biologically inclined to have oppressing sexual desires. To implicate men and their masculinity as dominant and sexually aggressive, is to withhold rape culture. The theory of sociobiology is applicable here, as it is the belief that “both reproductive and social behaviors are powerfully influenced by biological forces” (Kilmartin 57). As understood from the theory sex-linked social behaviors, such as male dominance and sexual assault, has a biological survival value for the individual as a method of a reproductive strategy. Rape, therefore, is a socially deviant behavior that is seen as an extreme strategy for reproduction. The sociobiology theory’s belief that all males are biologically programmed to exert sexual dominance, fails to recognize that less than “8% of men in college commit more than 90% of sexual assaults” (The Hunting Ground).
2011). The rape myths most widely studies and acknowledged included: husbands cannot rape their wives, women enjoy rape, women ask to be raped, and women lie about being raped. Assessment of such myths through measure such as The Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (RMAS; Burt 1980) and Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (IRMAS; Payne, Lonsway, Fitzgerald, 1994) show that not only does a portion of the population endorse them to some extent, but also that these beliefs permeate throughout media, religious, and legal domains. A troubling example of the myth that women ask to raped comes from Walklate (2008) in that 26% of polled participants thought a rape victim was partially or totally responsible if she was wearing sexy or revealing
Stephen Robbins and A.J.B UBRIN think organisational behavior (OB) includes three interrelated influence and contact area of research: the behavior of the individual level, the group level and the organisational level behavior.
Rape and sexual violence is a very serious problem that affects millions of people each year. Rape is someone taking advantage of another person sexually. Sexual assault can be verbal, physical, visual, or anything that forces a person to join in unwanted sexual contact or attention. ("Sexual Assault.") Rape is one of the most underreported crimes. In 2002, only thirty-nine percent of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to law officials. ("Sexual Violence: Fact Sheet.") Victims sometimes do not report that they have raped because of shame or feeling that it was their fault. It is never the victim's fault. "Victim blaming" is holding the victim of a crime to be in a whole or in partly responsible for what had happened to them. Most victims believe this. ("Myths and Facts about Sexual Violence.")
Organization citizenship behavior has been emerging as an interesting topic for any organization these days. Katz and Kahn (1996) were the first people to identify this kind of autonomous behavior in workplace. The term Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB’s) was first coined by Dennis Organ and his colleagues (Cf. Bateman & Organ, 1983; Smith Organ, & Near, 1983). Organ (1988: 4) defined Organizational citizenship behaviors as “individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization. By discretionary, we mean that the behavior is not an enforceable requirement of the role or the job description, that is, the clearly specifiable terms of the person’s employment contract with the organization; the behavior is rather a matter of personal choice, such that its omission is not generally understood as punishable.” Organizational citizenship behavior occurs when the individuals in organization implicitly go beyond the formal boundary of work required to do by him/her. Organization citizenship behavior can also be said to be the choice of individual to work beyond any limitation or expectations of their employers for the overall betterment of the organization. This is completely voluntary action and the employee’s work beyond the expectation of their organization. Organization citizenship behavior is gaining much attention in today’s organizations as it has several positive implications on the organizations. Organization citizenship behavior makes the employee more committed to the organization willingly and helps in promoting overall health of the organization. The employee...
Victim precipitation is a theory in criminology that analyzes how a victim 's interaction with the offender may have contributed to the crime being committed. Variation of intent by the offender and how the victim may or may not have contributed to the crime, regardless of the actions. With some offenders looking for the right situation to commit a crime, others show little to no prior intent. The approach with assumption that all offenders are equal in their drive and desire to engage in criminal activity was untenable. In 1974, Curtis attempted an integrated approach and sketched a grid that allows the degree of victim precipitation to vary. This strategy recognized five degrees of precipitation, ranging from pure victim precipitation to total offender responsibility. The table (p. 14) "The Precipitation Grid Outlining the Relative Responsibility
Victim precipitation refers to the role or responsibility that a victim has in their own victimization. In the first generation of victimization theories and victimologist the idea of victim precipitation was studied and thought to be a piece of the whole picture of a crime committed. As time progressed it was not thought to be as much as a factor.
Organizational behavior is the study of the many factors that have an impact on how people and groups act, think, feel, and respond to work and organizations and how organizations respond to their environments. (George & Jones, 2005) Organizational behavior is particularly important to managers, who are responsible for supervising the activities of one of more employees.