History of Police Stop and Search Powers in the UK

History of Police Stop and Search Powers in the UK This dissertation charts the history of the stop and search powers of the British police from the old days of the notorious Brixham riots, the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry up to the modern day. Throughout this journey we will examine the use of stop and search under various statutes, concentrating on the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and culminating in a discussion of the Terrorism Act 2000. The effect of the enforcement of the stop and search powers on the community will be examined. 1.0 Chapter I 1.1 Police Use of Discretion and Stop and Search The use of discretion is at the centre of the debates on police powers; that is the ability of police officers to make what are essentially subjective judgements in legal situations and still be operating within the boundaries of law. In fact, the use of discretion covers almost every aspect of police work, so the initial decision to stop and search a suspect to the decision to charge and prosecute for an offence in court. Discretion can take the form of whether or not to pursue an action, for example, whether or not to make an arrest, even where the grounds for arrest are evident. The law allows the police a wide range of lawful possibilities, to make a decision based on their own individual professional judgement about particular situations. In whatever decision a police officer makes, he or she is accountable to the law and not to his or her superiors. Police officers cannot be given orders by their superiors on how they should; for example, whether to arrest one person and not another. Thus, unlike in most hierarchical organisations, the greatest power in terms of law enforcement lies with the officers on the beat and not their superiors. The area of stop and search has aroused much academic research because it is an area where the officer on the beat has wide and often unsupervised discretion to enforce the law. More importantly, this is an area wherein a police officer can deprive someone of their freedom of movement even though there is may be no evidence that the person is committing, has committed or is about to commit an offence. Research evidence points to allegations that the police are unfairly targeting certain sectors of the community, in particular black and Asian people, with regard to their use of stop and search. It is extremely difficult to monitor an individual officers use of discretion in this area of police work. There are provisions for supervision by superiors and some training is usually provided for officers but there is more to be done in terms of monitoring the use of stop and search. In addition, there are Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) regulations on how stop and search is to be used in a non-discriminatory manner. However, it is still difficult to control the use of discretion in the use of stop and search. The discretionary and discriminatory use of stop and search powers (then the Stop and Search (SUS) law) by the Metropolitan Police (MET) was one of the major causes of the Brixton riots in 1981. The METs public pronouncement that Black people were in the majority amongst the muggers in London and the emerging labelling of Black communities as criminal and drug infested provided the legitimate backing for a militaristic policing of Brixton and the justification of the indiscriminate use of SUS on the residents of the area. This was an example of where public perceptions and politics give support to the use of discretion in policing, in this regard, the use of stop and search. The same scenario can be seen in the current use of stop and search in the UK (and presumably the USA) post-9:11. The scope for the use of discretion in stop and search has been significantly expanded in recent criminal justice, public order and anti-terrorism legislation whereby the reasonable suspicion element appears to have been pushed to the limit. The result has been very high figures of stop and search of the Asian Muslim population in the UK under a variety of anti-terror legislation. The use of discretion in police use of stop and search is still seriously being debated in academic and political circles, especially in relation to the issue of police racism. Minority ethnic people are not the only ones apparently discriminated against because of police use of discretion in stop and search. Young people are also believed to experience discrimination. In addition, variables of place (i.e. geographical area) and time of day or night come into play in understanding police use of discretion in stop and search (Clancy, Hough, Aust and Kershaw 2001). The use of police powers is important in the academic discourse about how the state rules through the law and its apparatuses. Police-citizenship relationship is essentially a power relationship at the micro-level. This relationship is often seen as an expression of how the state treats certain sectors of society at the macro-level. In other words, police powers are often seen as the personification of state power. 1.2 Monitoring It is apparent that until recent years, most police forces did not have information systems in place for monitoring stop and search. Even with the requirement to provide data on the ethnic breakdown of searches, some forces relied on counting stop and search by hand. This laborious paper exercise simply allowed forces to provide a breakdown of search by ethnic group to fulfil the requirements of Sec. 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 which requires that the Home Office publish ethnic monitoring data (Quinton and Bland 1999, p2) When it comes to monitoring the use of the stop and search powers, different constabularies record different information. This makes comparisons difficult and the question of proportionality more complex. The main point however, is that constabularies must be able to monitor the use of these powers and to thoroughly and proficiently able to analyse the data. In order to achieve this, the police or external staff who are carrying out such analyses must have appropriate monitoring skills. Fair use of police stop and search powers has the potential for raising public confidence in the police. In December 2004 South Yorkshire police said in its Statement of Agreed Policy (South Yorkshire Statement 2004); the use of stop and search powers directly impacts upon our relationship with the public. Historically, the use of stop and search has sparked much debate, as well as causing friction between the police and the public, particularly following publication of statistics showing apparent disproportionate use with regard to minority ethnic groups. Our use of this power must be fair and open to scrutiny, balancing the rights of individuals with the safety of the public, whilst at the same time increasing public confidence. It is an area where we will always come under scrutiny for evidence of unfairness or discrimination. The manner and approach an officer takes should at all times be sensitive, lawful, and effective in order to ensure public confidence and reassurance. (Appendix p2) Current national data on the use of stop and search power (e.g. Sec.95 Criminal Justice Act 1991) demonstrate considerable variation between constabularies which, when aggregated, indicate that black people and, increasingly Asians are more likely to be stopped and searched than their white counterparts, even in regions where the black and minority ethnic population is extremely small. In 1997-98, for example, Home Office figures revealed that one million stops and searches were carried out by the police under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) of which 11% were of black people, 5% Asian and 1% other non-white origin (Home Office, 1998, p. 5). The explanation for differential use of stop and search powers is complex. Rates of stops and searches differ between geographical areas and between ethnic minorities, more so if one applies the 16+1 ethnic categories. However, most statistics are still recorded in the 3+1 ethnic classification White, Black Asian and other. This has made it difficult to assess the use of stop and search powers on the smaller minorities such as Chinese people, people of mixed heritage and refugees. In addition, most records of stop and search are likely to be an undercount. Home Office research has suggested that most constabularies are presently not equipped to undertake the required, detailed analysis of stop and search or any other relevant data (Fitzgerald, 1997). The result of this state of affairs is that senior officers cannot identify precisely which of their divisions have staff who are using the powers in a biased way and, therefore, the individual officers who should be made accountable for their actions. Also, it is very doubtful if lower ranked supervisory staff, sergeants and inspectors in particular, have the skills to understand the analyses undertaken and to manage their officers appropriately if a biased use of stop and search (or any other powers for that matter) is identified This is, indeed, a serious issue (Holdaway S.1999 para.6 (v)) As indicated above in relation to the smaller minorities, another important issue, especially in relation to disproportionality, is how ethnic monitoring is done. A Home Office research about ethnic monitoring identified a police ambivalence about and, sometimes, hostility towards ethnic monitoring. The researchers summarized their findings in the following way; The research found that most police officers appeared to view ethnic monitoring as irrelevant at best; at worst, it was resented and/or feared as a stick deliberately designed to beat them with. . . . . . Those in senior management positions who were most actively supportive of monitoring were, nonetheless, wary of some of the possible repercussions of examining the statistics, both inside and outside the force; and most, in any case, had other, more pressing demands on them (Fitzgerald, 1997 pp viii-ix). The Home Office researchers also found that many officers thought that ethnic monitoring was primarily about documenting the crime patterns of ethnic minorities. If they had another view it was that monitoring was imposed to accuse them of bias. The attitudinal context within which ethnic monitoring undertaken is very unsatisfactory. The reasons why ethnic monitoring was introduced are controversial. Whatever the reasons, it has highlighted rather than explained Black criminality. Police use of stop and search is currently under much more scrutiny than ever before. A simple explanation is that the police have abused their stop and search powers in the past and so they have invited this close scrutiny and bridges of trust and respect have to be built with the local community. It is interesting that after Macpherson, when new guidelines were introduced on police use of stop and search in order to dispel allegations of discriminatory use of the law, the statistics show an increase instead of a decrease in police use of stop and search against Black people. However, it is reasonable to assume that ethnic monitoring has had some effect on police use of discretion in stop and search, no matter how small. The police are aware of possible accusations of racism when they use their powers of stop and search. Thus, the use of discretion by the police in this regard is constrained by the political climate within which policing takes place. Finally, it should be noted that the collection of ethnic monitoring data is designed mainly to analyse differential outcomes of the use of stop and search and arrest powers. However, these standard data have a very limited use. They are the record of the outcome of an action not of the actions that led to the outcome. Local police managers therefore need to be able to analyse ethnic monitoring data to identify the processes that led to differential outcomes. Unless these data are used to identify the processes that have led to racial discrimination for example, effective change cannot be realised and achieved. A great deal of work has to be done by the police if the differential use of stop and search, or any other powers, is to be identified and appropriate action taken. The Home Office should prepare a standard monitoring system, used by officers with demonstrable skills in the analysis of data, and its use within all constabularies should be required and assessed by HMIC (Her Majestys Inspectorate of Constabulary). Thought needs to be given to placing the ability to analyse data as a core skill for promotion to supervisory rank. The development of analytical skills should be assessed routinely in staff appraisals. Officers need training in data analysis; in moving from a reliance on outcome data, to identifying the processes that have resulted in particular outcomes. On the issue of monitoring, the Home Secretary did appoint an implementation group to ensure that the Lawrence Inquiry action plan was realized within the police. Although the membership of this group was not finalised, it was mostly made up of members of the police representative associations and other interested parties. The implementation group did not have members who were experts in the monitoring of policy implementation. Indeed, it was dominated by the representatives of various police staff and other associations, who have proved themselves to be less competent than in the very task they are supposed to be monitoring police policy implementation. The reason for this membership is probably that the Home Secretary felt that he would have to retain the confidence and support of the police as policies developed. This is understandable, but not sufficient for the stated purpose of the implementation group. It is now critical for organisations like the Runnymede Trust to ensure that the implementation group considers adequate monitoring information and that their work is effective. The suggestion that a monitoring group should be monitored sounds cumbersome and monotonous. However it would appear to be necessary if progress is to be made ( Holdaway, 1999 para 6 ( xi to xii) ). Discussion of police use of discretion is often linked with the academic discussion of police occupational subcultures. Although most elements of police culture are universal, each agency possesses its own personal and distinctive organisational culture. Therefore it is quite difficult to find an uncomplicated definition of police culture. There are several varied definitions, some being more complex than others. According to McDonald (1997): The concept of police culture is comprised of the merging of two major components, (a) the image of impartial and professional crime fighters that the police have of themselves, and (b) a system of beliefs and behaviour not described in published manuals or agency value statements. (McDonald et al, 1997). This definition, whilst not obviously identifying a compelling positive element, does recognise more than just the negative. The public demands all professionals to be held at high standard, but for obvious reasons, policing has an even higher threshold to meet and all police officers must accept this higher standard. An integral part of the process of police acceptance of this higher standard is to understand the police culture, while retaining the resilience to both resist the negative and champion the positive. The police are the first step in the justice process, and the first rung on the ladder in the climb to dispensing justice in the hierarchy. If the police do not inspire confidence, then the whole justice system is viewed with disparagement and suspicion. If the police who are at the forefront of initiating the justice system is viewed with unease, then anything that emanates from their behaviour is similarly seen as tainted. In order for the public to have faith in the justice system and view it with respect and confidence, then it needs to be functioning properly in an unbiased manner from the start, namely the role of the police. However, the apparent unfair use of the law by the police is often linked to the culture of police officers. Authors have argued that racism, sexism, homophobic and anti-working class feelings exist within the culture of rank and file police officers and that it affects how they enforce the law or use their discretion in enforcing the law (Holdaway, 1983 and Chan, 1997). This argument has been used in explaining police use of stop and search and arrests, and the disproportionality question. Considerable research informs us about the contours and power of the rank-and-file occupational culture, (Holdaway, 1983 and Chan, 1997). In terms of minority ethnic people, it is argued that this culture mediates wider racial categorisations and stereotypes black youths as criminal. It moulds these categorisations within the context of routine police work and affects police use of discretion. The Macpherson Report (Macpherson 1999) has introduced a new dimension in the debate by asserting that the police forces as a whole are institutionally racist. In the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, the oral evidence of the three representatives of the MPS Black Police Association was illuminating. As rightly quoted in Inspector Paul Wilsons evidence; The term institutional racism should be understood to refer to the way the institution or the organisation may systematically or repeatedly treat, or tend to treat, people differentially because of their race. So, in effect, we are not talking about the individuals within the service who may be unconscious as to the nature of what they are doing, but it is the net effect of what they do. (Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Part 2, Day 2, p. 209) A second source of institutional racism is our culture, our culture within the police service. Much has been said about our culture, the canteen culture, and the occupational culture. How and why does that impact on individuals, black individuals on the street? Well, we would say the occupational culture within the police service, given the fact that the majority of police officers are white, tends to be the white experience, the white beliefs, the white values. Given the fact that these predominantly white officers only meet members of the black community in confrontational situations, they tend to stereotype black people in general. This can lead to all sorts of negative views and assumptions about black people, so we should not underestimate the occupational culture within the police service as being a primary source of institutional racism in the way that we differentially treat black people. Interestingly I say we because there is no marked difference between black and white in the force essentially. We are all consumed by this occupational culture. Some of us may think we rise above it on some occasions, but, generally speaking, we tend to conform to the norms of this occupational culture, which we say is all powerful in shaping our views and perceptions of a particular community. (Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Part 2 Day 2, p. 211). Macpherson (1999) drew attention to these and other similar comments noting; We believe that it is essential that the views of these officers should be closely heeded and respected (Macpherson 1999, p. 25) The study in one local constabulary (South Yorkshire Police), by analysing 1998 samples, it was found that young black males between ages 15 and 25 had a 1 in 3 chance of being stopped per year, Asians a 1 in 6 chance, and whites a 1 in 10 chance. Blacks formed 0.8% of the countrys population and Asians just over 3% (Holdaway, 2003). Ethnic minorities and predominantly black youth are stopped for the suspected possession of drugs, often, small amounts of cannabis that do not lead to a court appearance. In this study it was found that black youths were more likely to be stopped for the possession of drugs, while white youths were most likely to be stopped for suspected possession of stolen goods or being equipped to steal. However, there is no available evidence to suggest that black youths use drugs more than any other ethnic group (Graham and Bowling, 1996). Although in his study, Holdaway found that the actual number of young blacks and Asians stopped and searched were small and the legal power used fairly infrequently. It cannot be assumed that its impact on the views of ethnic minorities has been proportionate. Holdaway maintains that suspicions about the disproportionate use of stop-and-search powers have fuelled a sense of discrimination among ethnic minorities. The Macpherson Inquiry 1999 into the death of Stephen Lawrence re-emphasised the need for the police services to scrutinise stop and search powers in the context of wider community relations. The Inquiry pointed to discrimination at an operational level as fuelling and leading to the publics loss of trust in the police services. The recording of self-defined ethnicity forms part of Macpherson Recommendation 61, but until 1999 several forces had to date, based ethnic monitoring on officers visual perception. Concerns have been raised about the use of self defined ethical classification as required by the Macpherson Inquiry. Police forces were themselves apprehensive about the way the public might respond and how such responses ought to be used as management information. After all, some ethnic minorities might describe themselves as British, which would make ethnic monitoring more problematic. Also the actual raising of the issue of ethnicity might make stop and search more confrontational and lead to criticisms of differential treatment which in turn would fuel the allegations of discrimination. If communities in general have no confidence in the police then they will not assist the police by providing valuable information about possible criminal activity within the communities. It is a basic fact that the police need the public in order to prevent, investigate and control crime. 2.0 Chapter II This chapter will look at the variation in the manner in which various police forces used stop and search and how the P A C E Codes of Practice of stop and search can be interpreted. Since the early nineteenth century, the police have had wide ranging local powers to stop and search individuals whom they suspect of criminal intent. This Chapter will trace the history of stop and search powers and in particular their development and utilisation under PACE. 2.1 Police Powers of Stop and Search Under The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) Police powers to carry out stop and search dates back to the Vagrancy Act of 1824. This was the old SUS. Under sections 4 and 6 of this law, the police are empowered to stop any person found loitering in a public place on suspicion of intent to commit a cognizable offence. In addition, in London, section 66 of the Metropolitan Police Act (1839) allowed MET police officers to stop and search in London, where there was reasonable suspicion that a person was carrying anything stolen or unlawfully obtained. Interestingly, an internal record was kept not only of the searches but also of all stops under these powers. These were recorded divisionally and the figures collated centrally. Even before the advents of PACE there were concerns regarding police use of the stop and search powers. Reports produced by Willis (1983) and Smith (1983) showed that officers frequently abused the reasonable suspicion requirements attached to the powers. The reports also revealed that these powers were applied disproportionately towards members of the black community. In fact, during the 1970s, there were public concerns about police discrimination in the use of SUS and these anxieties were publicised by various organisations such as the Scrap Sus Campaign (1979) and there were calls for the stop and search powers to be regulated or even scrapped. As mentioned in chapter one, it was the indiscriminate and heavy-handed approach to the use of the SUS law in London that led to the Brixton disturbances in 1981. The mounting complaints led to SUS being a major issue reviewed by Lord Scarman. The subsequent report (The Scarman Report) recommended the replacement of SUS. SUS was repealed and then replaced with a new power of stop and search (SAS) in the Police and criminal Evidence Act (PACE) of 1984. Section 1 of PACE allows the police to stop and search any person or vehicle when the officer has reasonable grounds for suspecting that stolen or prohibited articles will be found. The police are permitted to carry out a full search of the person including anything they may be carrying or any vehicle they are in. PACE was implemented in order to clarify the circumstances in which people could be stopped and searched as well as building in safeguards for the individuals concerned. The introduction of PACE was the first time legislation that had been introduced to properly consolidate what had become a disparate range of powers in respect of the use of stop and search by British police officers. In addition the introduction of PACE could have been accelerated by the report of the Royal Commission on Criminal Procedures (1981) which had recommended improved stop and search powers. Also the Scarman Inquiry specifically said that the way in which stop and search had been carried out had contributed towards the level of tension in Brixton. In Lord Scarmans concluding comment he quoted that; The state of law is, however, a mess, as the Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure has shown The PACE powers allow for searches to be carried out on the basis of reasonable suspicion. Additionally, police officers retain the ability to carry out voluntary or non-statutory searches. As Bland, Miller and Quinton (Home Office: 2000) remarked: In practice this (PACE) was an extension of powers. The Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure recognised the need to balance this extension with safeguards to protect the public from random, arbitrary and discriminatory searches (p 6) Stop and searches carried out under PACE must be carried out in accordance with the Codes of Practice, Code A. From April 2006, following Section 61 of the Macpherson Report, the recording of stops became a requirement for all police forces. In a recent report by the National Implementation for the Recording of Stops, Michael Shiner with the assistance of Nisrine Mansour, Eleanor Stokes and Athina Vlachantoni (Home Office, 2006) suggest that the implementation of compulsory recording of all stops will improve police accountability to the public and will protect the officer from false allegations and misrepresentation from public encounters. It is hoped by the Police Federation that the recording of stops will promote better two-way communications between the police and the public. The National Implementation for the Recording of Stops commissioned by the Stop and Search Action Team undertook valuable research into police attitudes, training, leadership, data capture, community engagement, accountability and engagement (Police Federation 2006, p 3). The report was an honest but blunt appraisal of how many within the force feel about stop and search. One of the big concerns was the slur officers felt on the reputation of the force being linked with institutional racism. A common strand throughout was the issue of disproportionality and officers attitudes towards it. Quite evident was the lack of common understanding at all levels of this term except that it is feared. However, officers are keen to emphasise the value of stop and search as a policing tool needed for communitys safety and protection from crime and anti social behaviour. It is one of the best examples of intelligence led policing and the easiest way of targeting persistent offenders and infiltrating crime hot spots. However studies have shown that many stops are not recorded at all. This is only a breach of the law if the PACE powers are actually exercised and if the suspect is searched or arrested (Sanders Young, 2000; ch.2) 2.2 The Code of Practice (Code A) The most controversial area of stop and search law (or even police law generally) is the definition of reasonable suspicion. Code of practice (Code A) defined what reasonable suspicion should mean in the practical sense of the use of stop and search. In para 2.2, the Code states: Reasonable suspicion can never be supported on the basis of personal factors alone without reliable supporting intelligence or information or some specific behaviour by the person concerned. For example, a persons race, age, appearance, or the fact that the person is known to have a previous conviction, cannot be used alone or in combination with each other as the reason for searching that person. Reasonable suspicion cannot be based on generalisations or stereotypical images of certain groups or categories of people as more likely to be involved in criminal activity, (Code A para.2.2). (The latest version of the Codes of Practice came into effect on February 1, 2008, (SI 2008/167) but it does not make major changes to the existing Code A). The term disproportionate is used in the Code (Code A, par. 5.3). This is unfortunate as it has negative connotations and is synonymous with mistrust. The Codes (Code A Section 5) introduce a responsibility on supervisors to monitor and detect any disproportionality in the searches their officers conduct. The Home Office and Chief Officers readily admit they do not understand the term and yet are determined to judge police officers by it. The term proportionate would be more appropriate and implies a considered and necessary uses of stop and search powers. Furthermore, it seems that additional research should be commissioned into the many complex issues surrounding analysis of stop and search, in particular of street populations. In the aftermath of the Macpherson Report and following recent changes to PACE one would expect the service to provide additional and focussed training. It is apparent that the new safeguards introduced by PACE have failed to fulfil their goals of preventing the misuse of the concept of reasonable suspicion and the abuse of the stop and search power (McLaughlin and Muncie, 2001). Bland, Miller and Quinton ( Home Office, 2000 ) noted that : Research has pointed to the difficulty, in practice, of making a clear distinction between PACE searches and those involving consent. An early evaluation of the impact of PACE in one force highlighted confusion about the distinction at both policy and operational level. There was evidence that some officers used consent to avoid the requirements of PACE for reasonable suspicion and that public consent was often given when ignorant of the right to refuse ( p 7) The Metropolitan Police Authority commissioned a community evaluation of the implementation of Recommendation 61 of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry in Hackney (Stop and Search, 2004). The evaluation was carried out by a black-led community organisation, the 1990 Trust. In this study, the police were told to record all stops and searches whether consensual or not, but not include those carried out under the terrorism legislation. A major concern of respondents in the study is that of not being given reasonable reasons for a stop. Existing research has shown that being given a reason for a stop is important to the public. In the Hackney study, over 86% of the respondents said that they had been told or had found out the reasons for the stop or stop and search. However, and more importantly, on further examination, over half (57%) of the respondents thought that the reason given for the stop was false. Being given an unconvincing reason for a stop was potentially as frustrating as being given no reason at all. For some respondents, it was tantamount to an insult to the intelligence of the person being stopped. The re

Ho Chi Minh Essay -- Biography

Ho Chi Minh meaning ‘enlightened one’ was born in Vietnam in the year 1890, to a teacher [Nguyen Sinh Huy] who was employed by the French. Nguyen had a reputation of being very bright and intelligent but he lost his job due his unwillingness to learn the French language, he was a strong nationalist. He taught his children to resist the ruling of the French; they all grew up to become strong nationalists who were willing and ready to fight for the independence of their country, Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh’s sister helped in stealing weapons when she was employed by the French government and sentenced to life imprisonment. Ho Chi Minh was sent to a French school by his father so as to prepare him for the struggle that was about to come against the rule of the French in their country Vietnam. After finishing his studies, he became a school teacher, then a sailor which really enabled him to travel to many countries in the world. By the travelling he made throughout the world , he was able to travel through other colonies of the Roman Empire and found out that the Vietnam’s were not the only ones who were suffering from their exploitation (Brocheux, 2007). Finally in the year 1917 Ho settled in Paris, reading books by different authors [Karl Marx] which were talking about communism eventually being turned into a communist himself. When the French Communist party was formed he became one of the founding members in the year 1920. He planned to take the teachings about communism that he had acquired so as to unite them and teach to the people of Vietnam, and also lead them to their own revolution from the French Empire (Shmoop, 2010). As Ho Chi Minh was preparing for the independence movement in his country Vietnam in the year 1941, it a... ...iation attempts were going on between Ho and Johnson but Hon Chi Minh stood his ground on his main determination of independence of the Vietnamese people under a Communist nation (Brocheux, 2007). Ho Chi Minh was a great nationalist to his country Vietnam. He was ready to go through any strategy so as to liberate his country under a Communist government. He went through much disappointments but the determination never left him. Ho Chi Minh died in the year 1969. References Zhai, Q. (2000). China and the Vietnam wars, 1950-1975. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Shmoop University Inc. (2010). The Vietnam War. Sunnyvale, Calif.: Shmoop University Inc. Johnson, K. F. (2012). Ho Chi Minh: North Vietnamese president. Edina, Minn: ABDO Pub. Brocheux, P., & Duiker, C. (2007). Ho Chi Minh: A biography. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Alzheimer’s Disease: The Importance of Public Awareness Essay -- Alzhei

Imagine greeting your grandmother and being met with a blank stare. Think about how it would feel to watch as your father forgets how to drive or dress himself. Picture your own mother crying out for her long dead parents and siblings. Try to envision the look on a loved one’s face as you tell them that they can no longer live at home alone. Now put yourself in their place-- slowly losing your freedom, your memory, and your very identity. Welcome to the world of Alzheimer’s disease. This is the reality that nearly fifteen million caregivers and over five million patients must face every day. Public awareness must be raised about Alzheimer’s disease and the people it affects. Alzheimer’s disease was discovered in 1906 by German physician Alois Alzheimer. While studying the biopsy of the brain of a fifty-five year old woman who had suffered some type of severe dementia, he noticed some aberrations in her brain structure. The brain appeared shrunken, with enlarged crevasses in the gray matter. Over a century later, we now know that Alzheimer’s is caused by a mixture of chemical and cellular brain abnormalities and the breaking down of cells in the mind. Most of the defects occur in the cerebral cortex, which is the outer gray matter of the brain and the center of most human-like brain functions like memory, language, and thought. About ten percent of the nerves in the cerebral cortex die as the disease progresses, causing the person to lose previously created synapses (connections between nerve cells). Neurofibrillary tangles, which are abnormally twisted and knotted strands within nerve cells in the cerebral cortex, also contribute to the cognitive impairment. Nerve cells in the brain lose the ability to create vita... ... a disorder that plays a huge role in the United States, and one that needs to be recognized. Public awareness of Alzheimer’s will stimulate research to increase, more support to be made available to those directly affected, financial solutions to be found, and an overall increase in understanding and compassion. By informing people about Alzheimer’s and its consequences, we can truly begin to battle this devastating disease. â€Æ' Works Cited Alzheimer's Association. 2011 Alzheimer's Disease Facts and Figures. Annual Report, Washington: Alzheimer's Association, 2011. August, Paul Nordstrom. Brain Function. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988. Check, William A. Alzheimer's Disease. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1989. Harmon, Dan. Life Out of Focus; Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 1999.

Evolution Vs Creation :: essays research papers

Creation vs. Evolution Is Evolution Biologically Impossible? How creationists justify their position against the evolutionary process, and how evolutionists answer them. The Overwhelming Odds against Spontaneous Generation Perhaps the most common scientific argument against the evolutionary theory used by creationists is the mathematical impossibility for the occurrence of successful changes in the DNA that actually results in a development of a new or modified species. What are the chances of evolving the DNA molecule - crucial to all life - by natural processes? Without an outside controlling designer of some kind, it is virtually impossible. Creationists argue that the complexity of a cell is extremely sophisticated and that the new and detailed understanding of the DNA molecules has revealed enormous problems for evolutionists belief in materialism. Creationists argue that in function, DNA is somewhat like a computer program on floppy disk. That it stores and transfers encoded information and instructions. They refer to publications saying that the DNA of a human stores enough information code to fill 1,000 books – each with 500 pages of very small closely printed type. Creationists compare the DNA code with computers, they say that DNA produces a product far more sophisticated than that of any computer. This enormous set of instructions fits within a single cell and routinely directs the formation of entire adult humans, starting with just a single fertilized egg. Even the DNA of a bacterium is highly complex, containing at least 3 million units that all are aligned in a very precise, meaningful sequence. DNA is described as a miniaturized marvel and with information so compactly stored that the amount of DNA necessary to code all the people living on our planet might fit into a space no larger than an aspirin tablet. Creation scientists are convinced that cells containing such a complex code and such intricate chemistry could never have come into being by pure, undirected chemistry. They claim that no matter how chemicals are mixed, they do not create DNA spirals or any intelligent code whatsoever. Only DNA reproduces DNA. Creationist also refers to scientists who calculated the odds of life forming by natural processes. Some estimated that there is less than 1 chance in 1040,000 that life could have originated by random trials. 10 to the 40.000th is a 1 with 40.000 zeros after it! However, here I found many different calculations published. Some said the chance was 10 to the 4.

Cph Herbal Medicines

10 Herbal Medicine RA NO. 8423- Phil Institute of Traditional and Alternative Health Care (PITAHC) Mnemonic is BUBLY/SANTA B-AWANG (Hypertesion,Lowers Cholesterol, Toothache) U-LISIMANG BATO (PANCIT-PANCITAN) (Lowers uric acid, Rheumatism) B-AYABAS (Diarrhea, Wounds, Toothache) L-AGUNDI (Cough, Asthma, Fever) Y-ERBA BUENA (Muscle Pain, Athritis, Rheumatism, Cough, Headache) S- AMBONG (anti-Edema, Diuretic, Anti-Urolithiasis) A-MPLAYA (Diabetes, Mellitus) N-NIOG-NIOGAN (Paratism, Arcariasis, Anti-Helmintic) T-SANG GUBAT (Stomachache, Diarrhea) A-KAPULKO (Scabies, Anti-Fungal & Athletes Foot) Aromatic Medicinal PlantsContains volatile oil for treatment of fever, cough, colds, itchiness and gaspain. 1. Petals- (sampaguita, Rosal, jasmine) * Sore eyes, conjunctivitis, eye wash. 2. Leaves- (ex. Suha, Calamansi, Mangga) * Fever 3. Plant: a. Tanglad/Sale- Fever (whole plants) b. Damong Maria- Cough/Colds/Dysminorrhea (whole plant) c. Leaves of Mansanilya- Gaspain d. Camias- Fever e. Sibuyas - Ferver Astringent and bitter tasting Medicinal Plants * Tannin and pectin (decrease peristalsis) A-VOCADO LEAVES B-AYABAS LEAVES K-AIMITO LEAVES D-UHAT LEAVES S-AGING LEAVES S-ANTOL LEAVES M- ANGOSTEEN FRUIT K- ASUY (NUTS/LEAVES) T-SAANG GUBAT (MOUTH WASH)EFFECT: ANESTHETIC AND DEPRESSANT EFFECT TREATMENT/DS: SKIN Problems 1. Akapulko Leaves 2. Kalachuchi 3. Malungay 4. Kakawati 5. Makabuhay DEPRESANTS 1. Dapdap Leaves 2. Dita 3. Makahiya ACHES/PAINS 1. Damong Marya 2. Sambong ASCABIES/ANTI-CANCER DRUG/ DEPRESSANTS 1. Chichirica 2. Mabuhay IMPOTENCE/ERECTILE DISFUNCTION/DEPRESSANT/SLEEPING 1. MAKAHIYA BRONCHODILATOR 1. TALAMTUNAY PIGSA 1. MAYANA PLANT SEEDS- most of the time, anti-helmentic 1. Patola Seeds- ABORTION/ANTI HELMENTIC 2. IPIL-IPIL 3. BETEL NUT 4. SQUASH SEED 5. LANSONES- insect-repelant GRASS FAMILY- diuretic (edema,urinary problem,ihi-ihi) . Tubo 2. Tanglad 3. Pandan Lalaki FOR ASTHMAS 1. KAGON 2. PUGO-PUGO 3. BUTO-BUTONES 4. GATAS-GATAS RENAL STONE- bato sa bato 1. CORN HAIR (BUHOK NG MAIS) Natural Family Planning (kulang yung family planning ko, please hanap nalang po kayo sa iba ng additional. Thanks) Girls 1. Spacing # of Prenancy & Ideal Timing a. Barriers b. Hormones- IUD, Condoms (male/female) cervical cup, vanginal sponge, spermicites 2. Scientific Family Planning a. Natural Method A. 1 Cervical Mucus Method A. 2 Basal Body Temperature A. 3 Lactating Amenorrhea b. Standard Days Method 3. Tubal Ligation

Examine how Miller creates dramatic tension Essay

Examine how Miller creates dramatic tension in the ‘yellow bird’ scene of The Crucible and consider how an audience might react Arthur Miller’s play, ‘The Crucible’, is set in Massachusetts in 1692, where mass hysteria led to the Salem witchcraft trials. The same kind of situation occurred in the1950s resulting in the Anti-Communist frenzy of that time known as McCarthyism. In my essay I intend to examine how Miller creates tension in the Yellow Bird scene by using dramatic effects to engage the audience in the play and keep them engrossed, involved and on the edge of their seats. At the beginning of act three, the mood is set by the stage directions and descriptions. It says, â€Å"the room is empty but for sunlight pouring in through two high windows in the black wall. † It gives the impression of solemnity and depression, and also makes the small room seem claustrophobic so the girls have nowhere to escape. This reflects the stifling society and the situation that the girls have got themselves into. The scene starts after Elizabeth has just lied to the court in order to protect her husband, which is a quiet scene. When the court starts accusing the Proctors, Hale stands up and shifts the blame on to Abigail, as he is the only person except for John Proctor who can see what is going on, apart from the audience who would now start to become a little frustrated. Abigail then creates a diversion by screaming and looking up towards the rafters. The stage directions say, â€Å"with a weird, wild, chilling cry, screams up to the ceiling. † She knows that she is in danger of the truth being exposed and tries to divert the attention from herself. Everyone is now staring at Abigail, the characters and audience not knowing what is going on. Gradually, the other girls join in as they understand what Abigail is doing and they put on a very convincing act to Danforth and the audience, which is very frustrating, as we know that she is guilty and now trying to get away with it. A yellow bird is mentioned and the girls pretend that they can see it on the beams and behind the rafters, while Proctor shouts that there is no yellow bird. Abigail starts to talk to the bird, to ask why it has come, to keep up the pretence of the dramatic situation. Mary’s name is mentioned, Abigail pretending that Mary is possessing the yellow bird as the devil and she screams, â€Å"My face? My face† to the ceiling, making it seem that she is the victim. Mary immediately springs to her feet and protests in shock, pleading Abigail to stop with the deception and to tell the truth. Abigail says that she cannot stop because it is God’s work that she does and this creates even more frustration and hatred towards Abigail from the audience because we know that Mary is innocent and Abigail is such a convincing liar. The other girls pick on the a trance and Mary gets more and more agitated as she cannot defend herself against the large cluster of girls in hysteria. They act like bullies, ganging up on her because she is weak and the tension builds up, as Mary gets more and more distressed. The girls start mimicking Mary, which is a typical playground-bullying device, which is guaranteed to undermine her. Abigail targeted her as she chose to confess and she will do anything to get her way, as she is frightened that Mary would reveal the truth. They then advance further to imitating Mary’s actions – stamping feet and shaking fists, strengthening the tension, and maddening the audience even more with aggravation. When the other girls copy Mary Warren’s actions, there is a lot of movement involved, which intensifies the frustration that the audience are feeling and the girls cannot go back on their decision to follow Abigail as they are all trapped in their own deceit. The audience are unsure whether Mary will give in or not as she is so weak and we already know how manipulating Abigail is. Mary protests and eventually weakens and starts whimpering like a wounded animal as she is overwhelmed by the conviction that she was being possessed by the devil in the form of the yellow bird Abigail conjured up. Danforth bullies Mary into speaking, â€Å"Speak! Will you speak! † and Proctor and Hale try to reveal the truth as the voice of sense. The whole scene climaxes with Mary out screaming all the other girls in pure desperation of them imitating her. This makes all the girls stop in astonishment creating a silence, which contrasts the noisiness with the quietness. Mary goes over to Abigail, who gives a look of triumph, as she finally succeeds in what she set out to do, by manipulating the situation to her advantage. Proctor loses his temper as Mary sides with the other girls in order to get herself out of the troubling situation and she claims John Proctor is the ‘Devils Man’. The audience are in dismay, as we know that Proctor is one of the only decent men and that he is in fact innocent. The scene ends with Proctor losing his temper and chaos starts as Hale tries to make Danforth see sense that Proctor is blameless and Abigail is the malicious one. Hale leaves the court and the scene ends with Danforth shouting to him to come back, leaving a cliffhanger into Act 4. Danforth became hysterical towards the end as a result of the chaos occurring. The continued action through the scene keeps the audience on the edges of their seats and feeling like they are part of the play, which keeps them interested and involved, because they are feeling the emotion and distress as Proctor and Hale are so they feel as though they are going through the dramatic situation with them. The vast amount of action keeps the scene moving and there is always something happening as when ever the situation is diverted, Abigail steps in and takes the Yellow bird to another level. The short, sharp sentences during the scene also contribute largely to the tension building up and everyone is cutting over each other’s sentences, which creates the idea of more chaotic occurrence. The negative words that are used by Abigail and against her create a negative atmosphere, for example. â€Å"I cannot stop! She sees nothing, mustn’t, never, don’t don’t. † Also John Proctor makes references to biblical allusions to stick with religion on the good side to help him get people to believe his innocence, â€Å"God damns all liars†, and â€Å"Angel Raphael† even though he is the one person least likely to be involved in organised religion. Watching this scene made me frustrated and agitated as the situation becomes so out of hand as Abigail puts on such a brilliant act to ensure that the attention is not on Proctor and Hale who are trying to reveal that she was behind all the accusations right from the beginning. This is also how I feel an audience would react as I reacted in that way every time Abigail took the situation to another level and manipulating everyone until she reaches her target of getting Mary Warren on her side and against John Proctor. I really enjoyed the play even though it was a sad ending.

Creation Science Should Not Be Taught in Public Schools Essay

Since the first days of religious evolution, religion and science have continuously fought for their place under the sun. The system of public schooling has become the field of the violent bloody conflict between the two different systems of beliefs. While religious fundamentalists sought to use public schooling as the means of religious propaganda, teachers and education professionals were trying to prove the relevance and importance of teaching objective scientific knowledge. Given the tension between science and religion, as well as the overt subjectivity of religious beliefs, religion in general, and creationism in particular, should not be taught in public schools, to provide children with the freedom of religious choice and to expand their intellectual and knowledge opportunities. The national system of public schools was always torn between the two opposite (religious and scientific) educational visions. While children were given a unique chance to look deeper into the essence of scientific knowledge, philosophers, education professionals, and religious adherents were trying to prove that religion did have to be taught at schools. Generally, religion is not a matter of scientific danger; moreover, religion can serve the source of reliable and never changing ethical and moral truths. The problem is, however, in that in its current state religion consciously denies an opportunity to reconcile with the objectivity and relevance of science. Moreover, religion works to deny the relevance of science as such, thus distorting children’s attitudes toward the world and putting them into a controversial environment filled with assumptions, myths, and beliefs. True, creationism and evolution seem incompatible; but while â€Å"many scientists are deeply religious and see scientific investigation and religious faith as complementary components of a well-rounded life† (Ludden 577), it is religion that promotes hostility toward science. Moreover, apart from being spiritual guidance, the Bible in general and the science of creation, in particular provide â€Å"the refuge from the calamities of life† (Green 581), while present day children should be prepared to face the realities of life, instead of trying to escape them. In the light of these hostile intentions and attitudes, it is understandable why education professionals are reluctant to integrate the science of creation with the major curriculum disciplines. Unfortunately, religious adherents do not accept the need for objectivity, which scientific knowledge promotes at schools. Instead of making religion a supplementary element of public education, fundamentalists view religion and the science of creation as instruments of propaganda. As a result, religion imposes narrow (and mostly misbalanced) convictions and opinions on children. As science seeks to reconcile with religion and to accept religion as a different (but not the opposite) scientific viewpoint, religion seeks to deny the relevance of science and does not accept the mere opportunity for science to be the basic element of public school education. The Kansas Board of Education has already limited the scope of scientific education in public schools, and the concept of evolution is no longer taught and explained to children. â€Å"This central concept of biology will be diluted or eliminated, thus reducing courses to do something like chemistry without the periodic table, or American history without Lincoln† (Gould 59). That is why the science of creation should not be taught at public schools – not because it does not have the right to exist, but because it promotes distorted scientific visions, and does not provide children with a chance to embrace the benefits of scientific advancement. The science of creation should not be taught at schools because it narrows the scope of the public schools’ development to absurdity and reveals true scientific ignorance. The science of creation should not be taught at schools because it is not science, but a set of ideas and beliefs that have never been documented or proved. To a large extent, religion should not be the central element of public education, due to the fact that it denies the need for intellectual development; it does not stir children’s imagination and cannot serve the object of scientific inquiry. As a result, the science of creation with its continuous denial of objective scientific achievements in general and evolution, in particular, is nothing more but the instrument of anti-intellectualism (Gould 59) which cannot promote intellectual progress at societal level. Krauthammer states that creationism is not included into any serious curriculum of any serious country, which means that serious countries and serious curriculum designers realize the intellectual threats of which creationism is the source. Moreover, it appears that serious countries are more attentive to the secular and scientific needs of their citizens and actively work to minimize religious fundamentalists’ access to public education. In our country, however, public schools remind a kind of a battlefield, with children being the victims of this secular vs. religious fight. Evolution is the sign of the ongoing scientific and natural progress, while creationism is the science of conservation that denies the need for social progress. Religion is an invaluable element of the social performance in America, but it is relevant to the extent that does not distort the founding principles of public education, with objectivity and freedom of choice in its center. Objectively, it is a matter of ethical tolerance, and in this situation science can teach children to hold and reconcile with contradictory beliefs. Religion has already ceased to be the source of tolerance, and creationism cannot teach children anything beyond unnecessary denial of the major scientific findings. Conclusion Creationism should not be taught at schools. Given the negativity and scientific denial which it promotes, religion will create distorted learning atmosphere and will work to impose religious beliefs on children. Instead of being the source of ethical values, religion has turned into the tool of anti-intellectualism and scientific conservation. As a result, to teach the science of creation at schools will mean to deprive children of the stimuli to search, investigate, learn and promote scientific and learning progress. Works Cited Gould, S. J. â€Å"Dorothy, It’s Really Oz: A Pro-Creationist Decision in Kansas Is More Than a Blow Against Darwin. † Time Magazine, no. 154 (1999): p. 59. Green, P. â€Å"The Battle Over Creationism. † In F. D. White & S. J. Billings, The Well-Crafted Argument: A Guide and Reader, 3rd ed. , Wadsworth Publishing, 2007, p. 580-83. Krauthammer, C. â€Å"The Real Message of Creationism. † 1999. Time. 11 May 2009. http://www. time. com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,992623,00. html Ludden, D. â€Å"Teaching Evolution at a Christian College. † In F. D. White & S. J. Billings, The Well-Crafted Argument: A Guide and Reader, 3rd ed. , Wadsworth Publishing, 2007, p. 576-80.