Past Contrasted with Present in Faulkners A Rose for Emily :: A Rose for Emily, William Faulkner

Past Contrasted with Present in Faulkner's A Rose for Emily  Ã‚   In "A Rose for Emily", Faulkner contrasted the past with the present era. The past was represented in Emily herself, in Colonel Sartoris, in the old Negro servant, and in the Board of Alderman who accepted the Colonel's attitude toward Emily and rescinded her taxes. The present was expressed chiefly through the words of the unnamed narrator. The new Board of Aldermen, Homer Barron (the representative of Yankee attitudes toward the Griersons and thus toward the entire South), and in what is called "the next generation with its more modern ideas" all represented the present time period (Norton Anthology, 2044). Miss Emily was referred to as a "fallen monument" in the story (Norton Anthology, 2044). She was a "monument" of Southern gentility, an ideal of past values but fallen because she had shown herself susceptible to death (and decay). The description of her house "lifting its stubborn and coquettish decay above the cotton wagons and the gasoline pumps--an eyesore among eyesores" represented a juxtaposition of the past and present and was an emblematic presentation of Emily herself (Norton Anthology, 2044). The house smells of dust and disuse and has a closed, dank smell. A description of Emily in the following paragraph discloses her similarity to the house. "She looked bloated like a body long submerged in motionless water, and of that palled hue" (Norton Anthology, 2045). But she had not always had that appearance. In the picture of a young Emily with her father, she was frail and apparently hungering to participate in the life of the era. After her father's death, she looked like a girl "with a vague resemblance to those angels in colored church windows--sort of tragic and serene" (Norton Anthology, 2046). This suggests that she had already begun her entrance into the nether-world. By the time the representatives of the new, progressive Board of Aldermen waited on her concerning her delinquent taxes, she had already completely retreated to her world of the past. She declared that she had no taxes in Jefferson, basing her belief on a verbal agreement made with Colonel Sartoris, who had been dead for ten years. Just as Emily refused to acknowledge the death of her father, she now refused to recognize the death of Colonel Sartoris. He had given his word and according to the traditional view, his word knew no death.

Influence of Culture on Human Technology :: Sanders The Men We Carry in Our Minds

Influence of Culture on Human Technology The influence that culture has had on human technology is undeniable. One could even go as far as to say that sometimes, it is difficult to distinguish between the two. The term â€Å"culture† is extremely difficult to define because of the vast array of meanings that people attach to it. For this very reason, it is imperative to examine the most basic notion of culture, namely: â€Å"the totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought† (as taken from www.dictionary.com). Given this definition, it seems reasonable to conclude that human technologies fall under the category of â€Å"all other products of human work and thought†. Yet, although human technologies are closely linked to culture, we must draw certain distinctions between the two. Today, for example, pop culture is thought of as the exportation of American music, food, and cinema. This is a legitimate example of a culture because it encompasses the ideas/beliefs/traditions of a vast group of people. Computers on the other hand, although great as inventions, cannot be considered a culture. One might argue that computers are part of a culture, or may have even led to a culture (namely, the information age), but in and of themselves, computers and other such human technologies are just that, technologies. Technologies can either be of the mechanical/scientific sort (such as the car) or they can be a type of innovative idea that changes life in some profound way. Having established workable definitions for both culture and human technology, we can now deal with the question of how culture has affected human technology. Given the broad scope of the question, there are several ways to answer it. One way of doing this would be to examine several different cultural movements or characteristics (i.e. art, religion, etc.) and see how they have helped create different human technologies. Another way of analyzing the relationship between the two however, is to look at a human technology and see how culture has altered it. This will be the method employed in this essay. I) Religion and War One of the most obvious examples of a culture or a cultural aspect influencing a human technology is the relationship between religion and the nation-state.

Erickson Integrity Versus Despair Essay

Older adults spend more time thinking and reflecting about their past than they use to. They also tend to be much less critical now of decisions made years ago then they do at that time. They often remember dreams they wanted and how close they may have come. Is this process of reflection something that older adults go through? This may be in response to retirement, the death of a spouse or close friends, or may simply result from changing social roles. According to Erikson (1982), a personality theorist who examined aging as a stage of development, this struggle comes about as older adults try to understand their lives in terms of the future of their family and community. As the older adult enters late life, they begin the struggle of integrity and despair, which is the process by which people try to make sense of their lives. Thoughts of the older adults own death is harmonized by the understanding that they will live on through their extended family. Erikson calls this understanding a â€Å"life-affirming involvement† in the present. Within the integrity versus despair, older adults encounter a life review, the process by which older adults reflect on the events and experiences of their lifetime. The most important event at this stage is coming to accept one’s whole life and reflecting on that in a positive manner. Erikson believed that to achieve integrity, a person must come to terms with the choices and events that have made his or hers life unique, and accepting one’s life for what it is. He believed older adults that reached integrity become self-affirming and self-accepting, and they judge their lives to have been worthwhile and good. The adult feels a sense of fulfillment about life and accepts death as an unavoidable reality. Those people who can look back on their lives with happiness and decide that they have lived a well rounded and fulfilling life will gain ego integrity and will not be fearful of death. â€Å"People develop ego integrity and accept their lives if they succeed, and develop a sense of wisdom a â€Å"detached concern with life itself in the face of death itself†(Erikon’s Psychosocial Stages of Development, 2009). If a person looks back on their life and remembers negative thoughts and dissatisfaction with life they will develop despair and experience a fearfulness and anxiousness about death. â€Å"Too much wisdom leads to presumption, too much despair to a disdain for life† (Erikson’s Psychosocial  Stages of Development, 2009). It has also been said that â€Å"children won’t fear life if their elders have enough integrity not to fear death.†(Psychological Theory- Erikson, 1995). I think that Morrie Schwartz is a great example of Erikson’s integrity theory. Morrie’s basic core of integrity ran deep, more so than any one person. Morrie showed this when he commented on his own battle with Lou Gehrig’s disease â€Å"It was very important for me to make clear to myself that my body is only part of who I am. We are much greater than the sum of our physical parts. The way we look at the world is fashioned by our values and our thoughts about good and evil, things that go into making up who we are†.

Kinds of Medical Thermometers

MEDICAL THERMOMETER Medical thermometers are used for measuring human body temperature, with the tip of the thermometer being inserted either into the mouth under the tongue (oral or sub-lingual temperature), under the armpit (axillary temperature), or into the rectum via the anus (rectal temperature). CLASSIFICATION BY TECHNOLOGY Liquid-filled The traditional thermometer is a glass tube with a bulb at one end containing a liquid which expands in a uniform manner with temperature. The tube itself is narrow (capillary) and has calibration markings along it.The liquid is often mercury, but alcohol thermometers use a colored alcohol. Medically, a maximum thermometer is often used, which indicates the maximum temperature reached even after it is removed from the body. To use the thermometer, the bulb is placed in the location where the temperature is to be measured and left long enough to be certain to reach thermal equilibrium—typically three minutes. Maximum-reading is achieved by means of a constriction in the neck close to the bulb. As the temperature of the bulb rises, the liquid expands up the tube through the constriction.When the temperature falls, the column of liquid breaks at the constriction and cannot return to the bulb, thus remaining stationary in the tube. After reading the value, the thermometer must be reset by repeatedly swinging it sharply to shake the liquid back through the constriction. Mercury Mercury-in-glass thermometers have been considered the most accurate liquid-filled types. However, mercury is a toxic heavy metal, and mercury has only been used in clinical thermometers if protected from breakage of the tube.The tube must be very narrow to minimize the amount of mercury in it—the temperature of the tube is not controlled, so it must contain very much less mercury than the bulb to minimize the effect of the temperature of the tube—and this makes the reading rather difficult as the narrow mercury column is not very visible. Visibility is less of a problem with a coloured liquid. In the 1990s it was decided [by whom? ] that mercury-based thermometers were too risky to handle; the vigorous swinging needed to â€Å"reset† a mercury maximum thermometer makes it easy to accidentally break it and spill the moderately poisonous mercury.Mercury thermometers have largely been replaced by electronic digital thermometers, or, more rarely, thermometers based on liquids other than mercury (such as galinstan, coloured alcohols and heat-sensitive liquid crystals). Electronic or Digital Since compact and inexpensive methods of measuring and displaying temperature became available, electronic thermometers (often called digital, because they display numeric values) have been used. Many display readings to great precision (0. 1  Ã‚ °C or 0.   Ã‚ °F, sometimes half that), but this should not be taken as a guarantee of accuracy: specified accuracy must be checked in documentation and maintained by perio dical recalibration. A typical inexpensive electronic ear thermometer for home use has a displayed resolution of 0. 1  Ã‚ °C, but a stated accuracy within  ±0. 2  Ã‚ °C when new. [1] The first electronic clinical thermometer, invented in 1954, used a flexible probe that contained a Carboloy thermistor. [2] Contact Some electronic thermometers may work by contact (the electronic sensor is placed in the location where temperature is to be measured, and left long enough to reach equilibrium).These typically reach equilibrium faster than mercury thermometers; the thermometer may beep when equilibrium has been reached, or the time may be specified in the manufacturer's documentation. Remote Other electronic thermometers work by remote sensing: an infrared sensor responds to the radiation spectrum emitted from the location. Although these are not in direct contact with the area being measured, they may still contact part of the body (a thermometer which senses the temperature of the eardrum without touching it is inserted into the ear canal).To eliminate the risk of patient cross-infection, disposable probe covers and single-use clinical thermometers of all types are used in clinics and hospitals. Basal thermometer A basal thermometer is a thermometer used to take the basal (base) body temperature, the temperature upon waking. Basal body temperature is much less affected than daytime temperature by environmental factors such as exercise and food intake. This allows small changes in body temperature to be detected, such as those caused by ovulation [3] or changes in thyroid function [citation needed]. Glass oral thermometers typically have markings every 0. 1  Ã‚ °C or 0.   Ã‚ °F. Basal temperature is stable enough to require accuracy of at least 0. 05  Ã‚ °C or 0. 1  Ã‚ °F, so special glass basal thermometers are distinct from glass oral thermometers. Digital thermometers which have sufficient resolution (0. 05  Ã‚ °C or 0. 1  Ã‚ °F is sufficient) may be suitable for monitoring basal body temperatures; the specification should be checked to ensure absolute accuracy, and thermometers (like most digital instruments) should be calibrated at specified intervals. If only the variation of basal temperature is required, absolute accuracy is not so important so long as the readings do not have large variability (e. . , if real temperature varies from 37. 00  Ã‚ °C to 37. 28  Ã‚ °C, a thermometer which inaccurately but consistently reads a change from 37. 17  Ã‚ °C to 37. 45  Ã‚ °C will indicate the magnitude of the change). Some digital thermometers are marketed as â€Å"basal thermometers† and have extra features such as a larger display, expanded memory functions, or beeping to confirm the thermometer is placed properly. CLASSIFICATION BY LOCATION The temperature can be measured in various locations on the body which maintain a fairly stable temperature (mainly sub-lingual, axillary, rectal, vaginal, forehead, or tem poral artery).The normal temperature varies slightly with the location; an oral reading of 37  Ã‚ °C does not correspond to rectal, temporal, etc. readings of the same value. When a temperature is quoted the location should also be specified. If a temperature is stated without qualification (e. g. , typical body temperature) it is usually assumed to be sub-lingual. The differences between core temperature and measurements at different locations, known as clinical bias, are discussed in the article on normal human body temperature.Measurements are subject to both site-dependent clinical bias and variability between a series of measurements (standard deviations of the differences). For example, one study found that the clinical bias of rectal temperatures was greater than for ear temperature measured by a selection of thermometers under test, but variability was less. [4] Oral Oral temperature may only be taken from a patient who is capable of holding the thermometer securely under the tongue, which generally excludes small children or people who are unconscious or overcome by coughing, weakness, or vomiting. This is less of a problem with fast-reacting digital thermometers, but is certainly an issue with mercury thermometers, which take several minutes to stabilize their reading. ) If the patient has drunk a hot or cold liquid beforehand time must be allowed for the mouth temperature to return to its normal value. [5] The typical range of a sub-lingual thermometer for use in humans is from about 35 °C to 42 °C or 90 °F to 110 °F. Armpit The Armpit (axillary) temperature is measured by holding the thermometer tightly under the armpit. One needs to hold the thermometer for several minutes to get an accurate measurement.Rectal Rectal temperature-taking, especially if performed by a person other than the patient, should be facilitated with the use of a water-based personal lubricant. Although rectal temperature is the most accurate, this method may be con sidered unpleasant or embarrassing in some countries or cultures, especially if used on patients older than young children; also, if not taken the correct way, rectal temperature-taking can be uncomfortable and in some cases painful for the patient. Rectal temperature-taking is considered the method of choice for infants. 6] Ear Other kinds of medical thermometers exist, such as the tympanic thermometer that measures the temperature of the tympanum by infrared measurement, The thermometer has a projection (protected by a one-time hygienic sheath) which contains the infrared probe; the projection is gently placed in the ear canal and a button pressed; the temperature is read and displayed within about a second. These thermometers are used both in the home (models are available for prices starting at around 20 USD) and in medical facilities. Temporal arteryA newer development is the Temporal artery thermometer, which uses the infrared principle to accurately report a patient's tempera ture, with comparable accuracy to rectal thermometry. [citation needed] Forehead The band thermometer is applied to the patient's brow. It is typically a band coated with different temperature-sensitive markings using liquid-crystal or similar technology; at a given temperature the markings (numerals indicating the temperature) in one region are at the right temperature to become visible. This type gives an indication of fever, but is not considered accurate.

Brady Bill And Its Passage Essay Research

Brady Bill And Its Passage Essay, Research Paper Brady measure and its passageIntroductionThe legislative procedure in the United States Congress shows us an interesting play inwhich a measure becomes a jurisprudence through via medias made by diverse and sometimes conflictinginterests in this state. There have been many controversial measures passed by Congress, butamong all, I have taken a peculiar involvement in the transition of the Brady measure. When the Bradydebate was in full swing in Congress about three old ages ago, I was still back in my state, Japan, where the ownership of guns is purely restricted by Torahs. While watching televisionnews studies on the Brady argument, I wondered what was doing it so hard for this gun controlbill to go through in this gun force ridden state. In this paper, I will follow the measure # 8217 ; s seven yearhistory in Congress, which I hope will uncover how partizan political relations played a important function in theBrady measure # 8217 ; s transition in this policy doing subdivision. The Brady measure took its name from Jim Brady, the former imperativeness secretary of PresidentReagan, who was shot in the caput and partly paralyzed in the blackwash effort on thepresident in 1981. This measure was about a waiting period on pistol purchases leting constabulary tocheck the backgrounds of the prospective purchasers to do certain that guns are non sold toconvicted criminals or to those who are mentally unstable. Even the advocates of the measure agreedthat the consequence of the measure on controling the gun force might be minimum sing the fact that themajority of guns used for condemnable intents were purchased through illegal traders. However, the Brady Bill represented the first major gun control statute law passed by Congress for morethan 20 old ages, and it meant a important triumph for gun control advocates in their manner towardeven stricter gun control statute law in the hereafter. Gun Rights V. Gun ControlThe Brady measure, the Brady Handgun Violence Preventi on Act, was foremost introduced byEdward F. Feighan ( D-OH ) in the House of the100th Congress as HR975 on February 4,1987. The measure was referred to the Judiciary Committee, and the argument began. Throughout thedebate on the Brady measure, there was ever a clear partizan split ; most of the Democrats, exceptfor those from the Southern provinces, supported the measure while most of the Republicans were in theopposition. For illustration, when the foremost introduced Brady measure lost to an amendment by BillMcCollum ( R-FL ) for a survey of an instant cheque system ( 228-182 ) , most Republicans votedfor the McCollum amendment ( 127 for and 45 against ) while the bulk of the Democratsvoted against it ( 127 for and 137 against ) . The exclusion was the Southern Democrats most ofwhom joined the Republicans to vote for the amendment. This party division was non sosurprising, nevertheless, sing the immense run parts made by the main gun anteroom, the National Rifle Association ( NRA ) , directed largely to the Republicans, and the exclusion ofthe Southern Democrats could be explained by the gun right supportive nature of theirconstituents. In the 1992 election for illustration, this organisation made $ 1.7 million contributionto its sympathetic congressional campaigners and spent another $ 870,000 in independentexpenditures for congressional races.1 The influence the NRA exercised on the statute law wasenormous since the concluding measure passed in 1993 was a via media version reflecting some of theNRA-sought commissariats. I could state that it was because of this relentless anteroom that the Bradybill took every bit long as 7 old ages to go a law.On the other side, the advocators of the measure enjoyed a broad support from the populace aswell as from the Handgun Control Inc. , the main gun control anteroom led by Sarah Brady, the wifeof James Brady. The consistent public support for the measure from the debut through thepassage of the measure was manifested by many polls. One of the polls conducted by NBC Newsand Wall Street Journal on the passage of the measure said that 74 per centum of the 1,002respondents agreed that # 8220 ; the jurisprudence is good but more is needed. # 8221 ; 2 It is without inquiry that thispublic support played a important function in the eventual transition of the bill.The Brady measure passed the House in the 102nd CongressAfter about four old ages from its first debut to the Congress, the Brady measure wasreintroduced to the House in the 102nd Congress as HR 7 on January 3, 1991, sponsored by76 representatives including Feighan, William J Hughes ( D-NJ ) , and Charles Schumer ( D-NY ) .The measure was referred to the Judiciary Committee, and the hearings began in the JudiciarySubcommittee on Crime on March 21, 1991. As written, this measure required a weeklong waitingperiod on the pistol purchases. Schumer, the president every bit good as the head patron of the measure, explained before the Subcommittee that the Brady measure # 8220 ; has a really simple intent: to maintain lethalhandguns out of the custodies of people who shouldn # 8217 ; Ts have them.3 # 8243 ; Aside from the house supportfrom the populace, the measure besides gained the backup from the former president Reagan who, in atribute to James Brady, said that it is # 8220 ; merely kick common sense that there be a waiting period toallow local jurisprudence enforcement functionaries to carry on background cheques on those who wish to purchase ahandgun. # 8221 ; 4 This Reagan # 8217 ; s comment was important since he had long been a member of theNRA. On April 10, the Subcommittee approved to direct the measure to the Judiciary Committee bythe ballot of 9-4. The ballots were clearly divided along the party line with the exclusive exclusion ofF. James Sensenbrenner Jr. ( R-WI ) , one of the few GOP protagonists of the measure, who joined theDemocrats to vote for it. In the interim, the lobbying by both sides had inten sified. The NRAclaimed that the measure went against the rule of the Constitution, indicating out the SecondAmendment which says: # 8220 ; A good regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to maintain and bear Weaponries, shall non be infringed. # 8221 ; They argued that it wasnot the guns but the people who committed offenses, stating that tougher sentences for thecriminals would work better than the waiting period in cut downing offenses. On the other manus, James Brady was buttonholing intensely in his wheelchair supported by his-wife-led HandgunControl Inc. , which had an emotional entreaty to other members of Congress.In the Judiciary Committee, Harley O. Staggers Jr. ( D-WV ) , pushed by the NRA, proposed a replacement measure ( HR 1412 ) which would necessitate provinces to put up an instant checksystem so that gun traders could happen out instantly on a telephone call whether the purchaserhad a condemnable record without any delay. The Staggers # 8217 ; alternate, nevertheless, reminded many ofthe McCollum amendment that wrecked the Brady measure in 1988. With the recognition ofthe Attorney General, Dick Thornburgh, that the practical usage of such instant cheque systemwould be old ages away,5 the Staggers # 8217 ; replacement was rejected by the Committee by the ballot of11-23. The commission so proceeded to vote on the Brady measure ( HR 7 ) , O.K.ing it by the 23-11 ballot. On May 8, the Staggers # 8217 ; amendment was rejected once more ( 193-234 ) on the floor. TheHouse went on to O.K. the weeklong waiting period Brady measure by the ballot of 239-186, puting it on the Senate calendar on June 3. Argument in the SenateIn the Senate, the advocates of the Brady measure, including the Majority Leader George J. Mitchell ( D-ME ) , were working hard to maintain the Brady linguistic communication portion of the omnibus crimelegislation ( S-1241 ) which had already been passed by the House-Senate confe rencecommittee. Ted Stevens ( R-AK ) proposed an amendment to replace the waiting period with aninstant-check system. This amendment was really much similar to the Staggers # 8217 ; proposal made inthe House, guaranting that the possible purchasers who were eligible for the purchase would non haveto delay to purchase a gun. Stevens and other GOP oppositions argued that the waiting period wouldnot cut down the offense rate since it would non impact the bulk of felons who could purchaseguns illicitly while impacting the observant citizens # 8217 ; Second Amendment right to buy a gunfor athleticss and runing intents. In response to this statement, Mitchell and his other pro-BradyDemocrats maintained that developing a package for a national blink of an eye background checksystem would take old ages, and even if it was available, instant cheques would non work every bit adeterrent to hot-blooded offenses by those without condemnable records. Mitchell called the Stevens # 8217 ; progra m # 8220 ; a transparent attempt to extinguish the waiting period, # 8221 ; 6 stating that it was merely a pretense tothe populace to back gun command while really barricading it. On June 28, the Senate rejected the Stevens # 8217 ; amendment by the ballot of 44-54 with allbut nine Democrats, all from Southern or rural provinces, voting against it. The 54 ballots, nevertheless, were non plenty for the Brady advocators since they would necessitate 6 more ballots to halt a possibleGOP filibuster. On the other manus, filibustering was non the best solution for the GOPopponents neither, since in making so, they would hold to give the offense measure they wanted. Resulting from this state of affairs was a via media by Mitchell, Metzenbaum, and the GOPleader Bob Dole ( R-KS ) . In this via media, the length of the waiting period was changedfrom seven yearss to five concern yearss, and a new proviso was added which would stop thewaiting period in two and a half old ages upon the Attorne y General # 8217 ; s verification that the instantcheck system met certain criterions. However, it was the six ballots that determined the fateof the Brady measure in the 102nd Congress. The Senate failed to take concluding action before the terminal ofthe 1991 congressional session, and even with the transition in the House, the Brady measure still hadto wait two more old ages for its concluding transition. In the 103rd Congress ( House ) In 1993, the twelvemonth in which the Brady measure got enacted, there was a turning national tidefavoring stricter gun control. The Brady advocates were cheerful with an outlook that thelong-debated measure would eventually go through that twelvemonth. The rush in the public support was assuring ; aCNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll conducted during March 12 through 14 showed that 88 percentof their 1,007 respondents favored the bill.7 The gun control advocates besides had two significantvictories in two States ; in Virginia, a statute law was passed cur tailing pistol purchases to onegun purchase per month, and in New Jersey, the NRA and other gun rights advocates lost intheir attempt to revoke the province # 8217 ; s prohibition on selling assault rifles. Furthermore, the 103rd Congresshad a pro-Brady president. In contrast to Bush, a longtime NRA member, President Clintonopenly expressed his support for the measure ; in his address to Congress on February 17, he said: # 8220 ; Ifyou pass the Brady measure, I # 8217 ; ll certain mark it. # 8221 ; Confronting this countrywide pro-Brady tide, Even the NRAshowed a little alteration in its linguistic communication ; James Jay Baker, the top NRA lobbyist, said that hisorganization might be able to O.K. certain version of the bill.8 In this favourable ambiance, the Brady measure was introduced in the103rd Congress in theHouse as HR 1025 on February 22, 1993 by Schumer and 98 other cosponsors, referred to theJudiciary Committee. The president of the Committee, Jack Brooks ( D-TX ) ag reed to maintain thebill separate from his other overall offense statute law ( HR 3131 ) , promoting the Bradysupporters with a hope to go through the measure before the scheduled Thanksgiving dissolution. By thedirection of the Rules Committee, the House voted on the House Resolution 302, a ruleproviding for the floor consideration of the Brady measure, O.K.ing it by the ballot of 238-182. Aswritten, the measure provided for a five-day waiting period upon pistol purchases every bit good as theestablishment of a national instant felon background cheque system. The measure besides had aprovision necessitating that the waiting period stage out upon the Attorney General # 8217 ; s blessing of theviability of the countrywide instant cheque. The measure by so already represented a compromisebetween the Brady waiting period and the NRA blink of an eye check.On the floor, the GOP oppositions proposed a series of amendments. George W. Gekas ( R-PA ) offered an amendment stoping the waiting period after five old ages from its enforcementregardless of the viability of the replacement instant cheque system. Schumer argued that the Gekas # 8217 ; alleged sundown proviso was an unrealistic deadline, indicating out the changing condemnable recordkeeping of each States. However, Gekas and other advocates of the amendment insisted thatthe sundown proviso was necessary in order to coerce the Justice Department to set up the computing machine cheque system quickly. The Gekas # 8217 ; amendment prevailed on a 236-98 ballot. McCollum proposed an amendment which would revoke the bing State waitingperiods on the installment of the national blink of an eye cheque system. Some States had alreadyadopted waiting periods, and the Brady bill would not affect those states having a waiting periodof more than five days. McCollum claimed that his proposal would make the bill much fairerand more balanced, and assured that it would not affect other State gun laws such as Virginia’sone gun purchase per month legislation. However, meeting with strong opposition fromSchumer and others, this amendment preempting State laws was rejected 175-257. There wasanother amendment proposed by Jim Ramstad (R-MN) requiring the police to provide within 20days a reason for any denial of a handgun purchase. This amendment was accepted bySchumer, and was adopted easily by the vote of 431-2. The House proceeded to voted on the Brady bill on Nov. 10. Just before the vote, thechief sponsor Schumer encouraged other Representatives on the floor to vote for the bill, saying:†today’s votes gives the House of Representatives a real chance to stem the violence on our streets and calm the fear of our citizens.† The bill was passed by the House. It was the secondtime for the House to pass the Brady bill, and this time, the vote was 238-189. Passage in the SenateIn the Senate, the Brady bill was introduced as S 414 by Metzenbaum on February 24,1993, referred to the Judiciary Committee and placed on the calendar on March 3. The bill wasalmost identical to the Dole-Metzenbaum-Mitchell compromise approved by the Senate in June1991, requiring a five-day waiting period on handgun purchases which was to be removed oncean instant check system became operational. After a long negotiation, the Senate agreed to takeup the bill separately from the overall crime bill,9 which paved the way for the floor considerationof the bill on November 19. However, the threat of the unsatisfied GOP opponents to block the bill led to anagreement between the Majority Leader Mitchell and the Minority Leader Dole. Under thisagreement, the two leaders was to offer a substi tute, and the Senate would then vote on theHouse-passed version of the Brady bill (HR 1025) with the text of the substitute inserted in lieuthereof. The Mitchell-Dole substitute included two new provisions: the sunset provision and thepreemption provision, both of which had been sought by the NRA. The sunset provision wasidentical to the Gekas amendment passed by the House which would end the waiting period fiveyears, and the preemption provision was the same as the McCollum amendment rejected by theHouse. At the beginning of the debate on November 19, Mitchell made it clear that he hadagreed to cosponsor this bipartisan compromise as a procedural means to move the long-debated Brady bill through the Senate. The Majority Leader then declared that he would nowmove on to eliminate those two provisions with which he totally disagreed. The Mitchell-Doleagreement provided, however, that if either or both of those provisions were to be stricken, theRepublican opponents would then block th e bill, which meant that the Brady proponents wouldneed at least 60 votes to stop the GOP filibuster to pass the bill and send it to the House.Mitchell and his other Democratic proponents succeeded to pass an amendment striking thepreemption language of the Mitchell-Dole substitute on a vote of 54-45. The other amendmentproposed by Metzenbaum to strike the sunset provision, however, was defeated 43 -56. TheSenate then moved on to the consideration of the Mitchell-Dole substitute with one provisionthus amended. Throughout the debate, the proponents spoke fervently in support of the bill. EdwardM. Kennedy (D-MA) argued that it was time to take action against the epidemic of gun violencein the country, showing shocking statistics which demonstrated the increasing number of gun-related crimes and deaths. He claimed that the waiting period would not only curb the spread ofguns by keeping the lethal weapons out of the hands of convicted felons, but it would alsoreduce the crimes committed in the heat of the moment by providing a cooling off period. Senators whose States had already adopted waiting periods demonstrated with data that thewaiting period had already been proven to work in stopping a significant number of handgunpurchases by convicted felons. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) showed that her State’s 15-daywaiting period stopped 8,060 convicted felons, 1859 drug users, 827 people with mentalillnesses as well as 720 minors from purchasing a gun during January 1991 and September1993. The freshman Senator from California maintained that even though her State’s crime ratewas â€Å"unacceptably† high, it could have been much worse without the legislation. Dole and other GOP opponents, however, insisted that they would continue their effortsto thwart the passage of the bill unless the preemption language was included. Mitchell promptlyrejected the GOP demand, criticizing the double principles of those who, having once insistedthat they could not supp ort the Brady bill because it was the Federal Government telling theStates what to do, turned around and said that they now liked the preemption. Metzenbaumjoined in the argument against the GOP opponents, saying they were blocking the bill â€Å"becausethey were scared to death of the National Rifle Association,† and calling their demand for thepreemption provision â€Å"an effort to kill the bill.† Both sides did not yield, and with two cloturemotions having failed to quash the Republican-led filibuster, one in the afternoon (57-42) and theother at 11 o’clock at night (57-41), the Brady bill was thought by many dead again in theSenate. It was the dissatisfaction of a handful of Republicans with the outcome and their dread ofbeing blamed for killing this popular legislation that saved the life of the Brady bill. The followingday, the discontent of those Republicans who decided to cast a straight vote sent Dole to thenegotiating table again, where he was forced to settle down with a new compromise whichcarried no preemption language. It was actually identical to the one that he and other GOPopponents had filibustered the day before except for the change in the sunsetting period; thecompromise bill would end the waiting period four years after its enforcement, instead of fiveyears, with a possible extension for another year upon the Attorney General’s request. Consequently, by unanimous consent, the Senate agreed to vote on the House-passedversion of the Brady bill (HR 1025) with the text of the compromise inserted in lieu thereof, andalso to request a conference with the House to reconcile the differing versions of the Brady bill.The Brady bill (HR 1025) as amended was passed easily on a vote of 64 to 36, and sent backto the House with a request for a conference. Toward the passageOn November 22, the House agreed to the request of the Senate for a conference uponthe adoption of House Resolution 322 by the vote of 238-187. The confer ees were appointedby the Chairs of each chambers: Brooks, Hughes, Schumer, Sensenbrenner, and Gekas fromthe House and Joseph R. Biden. Jr. (D-DE), Kennedy, Metzenbaum, Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT),and Larry E. Craig (R-ID) from the Senate. Later, Senate Republicans replaced Hatch andCraig with Stevens and Dirk Kempthorne (R-ID). The outcome was a conference report whichpreserved the House 5-year sunset of the waiting period with no provisions for the AttorneyGeneral to replace it with the instant check system before then. Several Senate-passedprovisions had also been dropped: the provision expanding the definition of antique firearmsexempt from gun restrictions to include thousands of functioning World War era rifles, and theone allowing gun sales between dealers from different states. A new provision was added in thereport which would require that the police be notified of multiple purchases.Soon after the conference, the chief Senate negotiator Biden explained how they got tothe conferen ce report. According to his statement, at the beginning of the conference, Stevens,a member of the NRA board of directors, announced that the only acceptable outcome for theSenate Republican conferees, Kempthone and himself, would be the Senate-passed version ofthe Brady bill unchanged. The Senate bill had a provision ending the waiting period as early astwo years after the enforcement if the instant background check met certain standards. All ofthe House conferees including the House Republican conferees rejected that demand, which ledto the adoption of the conference report accepted by all the House conferees, Republicans andDemocrats alike, and the Senate Democratic conferees. Thus, the conference report was madewith Stevens and Kempthorne casting dissenting votes.The House approved the conference report (H. Rept. 103-412) easily on a vote of238-187. In the Senate, however, after the explanation on the conference report, Dole andother Republican opponents fired at Biden with accu sations that he and other DemocraticSenate conferees completely ignored the wishes of the Senate in the conference. Dole said, â€Å"Idon’t think that under these conditions, cloture will be invoked this year or next year.†10 Throughout the day November 23, the hostile atmosphere occupied the Senate floor asthe debate continued. Majority Leader Mitchell declared that he was determined to force theissue to another vote during the year even though it would mean the post-Thanksgiving sessionwhich nobody wanted. Later in the day, he presented two cloture motions for November 30and December 1.The breakdown of the impasse came the following day, November 24, when Doleagreed to accept the terms of the conference report under a compromise that he would submit aseparate bill with the Senate-passed provisions, which was to be considered and votedimmediately in January as soon as the Senate returned to business. Obviously, this solution wasprompted by the loathing of most senator s to come back from their respective States toWashington after Thanksgiving break as well as by the pro-Brady public pressure.Consequently, the Senate approved the conference report by unanimous consent. After seven years of debate, the Brady bill was finally passed by the 103rd Congress.President Clinton, as he had promised, signed the bill into law on November 30, and the Bradybill became Public Law 103-159. Beyond the passageThree years have passed since the passage of the Brady bill, but the fight of Jim andSarah Brady and other gun control advocates still continues for stricter gun control legislation. Inearly 1994, they succeeded in passing the assault weapons ban with the Brady momentum, butsince then the NRA has intensified its lobbying, declaring to repeal the gun control legislation. In1994 elections, for example, the NRA spent $3.2 million to get its supporters elected.11 The last1996 election was also a victory for the NRA in that many of its supporters got re-elected ev enthough their member Dole was defeated by Clinton in the Presidential race. Their most powerfulsupporter in the Congress is probably the House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), who oncewrote in his letter to the NRA chief lobbyist Tanya Metaksa: â€Å"As long as I am Speaker of thisHouse, no gun control legislation is going to move in committee or on the floor of this House.†12Even with the GOP majority in Congress, however, it is sure that NRA supporters will face amajor obstacle in the newly-reelected President Clinton, who has declared: â€Å"For all the thingsthat will be debated, you can mark my words, the Brady law and the assault weapons bill arehere to stay. They will not be repealed.13? Currently, the Supreme Court is hearing a lawsuit filed by NRA-backed gun controlopponents. They claim that the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act violates the 10thAmendment of the Constitution which protects state and local government from certain federalinterference. The NRA says i t wants to repeal the waiting period as well as the backgroundchecks,14 which reveals the organization’s true intention when it supported the backgroundchecks in its fight against the passage of the Brady bill. The battle between the NRA and theHandgun Control Inc. will continue with the NRA supporters leading the Congress andPresident Clinton challenging them with the veto power. Nevertheless, the Brady bill, with itsunwavering public support, will be the hardest bill to repeal. The passage of the Brady bill of 1993 is one of the best case studies of the legislativeprocess in the U.S. Congress. The seven year history of the bill demonstrated how partisanpolitics played a crucial role in the outcome of the bill, and how difficult it was to make bipartisancompromises to move the bill through Congress. In concluding this research report, I would like to express my deepest respect for thosewho worked hard for the passage of the Brady bill, including Jim and Sarah Brady.

Zara clothing company Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4000 words

Zara clothing company - Essay Example Zara remains the most competitive fast fashion company globally, the latest profit forecasts amounting to $3billion dollars as Burberry following suit at a total of $2.5billion. Further, the study reveals on the sole managerial and production strategies liable to the company’s current position in the fashion industry. The company’s competitive and innovative strategies denote the key to success despite the challenges that the company meets from close competitors, for example, H&M, Burberry, and Armani. ... The report establishes the macro and micro elements of evaluating progress in Zara and the appropriate steps to measure and ascertain the future outcomes. Zara remains the most competitive fast fashion company globally, the latest profit forecasts amounting to $3billion dollars as Burberry following suit at a total of $2.5billion. Further, the study reveals on the sole managerial and production strategies liable to the company’s current position in the fashion industry. The company’s competitive and innovative strategies denote the key to success despite the challenges that the company meets from close competitors, for example, H&M, Burberry, and Armani. The recommendations serve as strategic approaches that are viable to recuperate the company’s dwindling strategies in the internal and external environments. The report stipulates the adaptive characteristics that seem appropriate in resolving Zara’s challenges in order to achieve goals and objectives, and curb the craving threat of competitors and other market variables. The conclusions reveal the process upon which Zara amassed strategies and dominated a competitive edge. Further, an evaluation of the tactics reveals a number of prevailing loopholes in the product mix that may affect the company’s long-range plans and objectives. Introduction The Spanish fashion company Founded in the year 1975 remains to be the most competitive fashion company in production of affordable clothing for the female and male youthful genders. The founder, Amancio Ortega established the company with the intentions of diversifying investments throughout the Spanish nation, to ensure an effective to the youthful clients (Temporal, 2011, p.56).

Narrative Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 2

Narrative - Essay Example I was however born with a rebellious streak and this made me meet my male friends at a place, the rock-side park that we had designated for this purpose. (Appositive) It was peaceful, cheerful and had a wonderful scent to it, and my only goal at the time was to change people’s mindsets, despite being so young, with regard to accepting the fact that girls and boys can be friends. Soon, among all my friends, I grew to have a close bond with Ali. Ali and I grew to be very attached to each other as we would always play together and go for walks. I shared every thought with him and both of us were teased by all our other friends. â€Å"You both are going to end up getting married one day!† one of them would remark. â€Å"And then you will have little babies to play with!† another would add childishly. Ali and I always laughed these taunts off because at the time we did not understand the concept of marriage. We would often walk to the candy store, team up in games together and share our problems and achievements with each other. As time passed, our relationship grew into a very strong bond of friendship that no one could break. Ali was always protective of me and watched out for me. We stuck to each other during the good and the bad times and grew to become extremely fond of each other. While playing games, Ali and I would always side together in teams and defeat the others. Our friends would always tell us, â€Å"Both of you make an excellent pair!† Soon though, my family, including myself, relocated to the United States of America, and at that time, I was apprehensive of the relationship that shared with Ali. Till the time that we were together, things were good for us however, we had never given any thought to what life would be like without the other person around. We did not realise that we had grown so close to each other that it was impossible to spend some time apart.