Date: 21.2.2017 / Article Rating: 4 / Votes: 677
Lex.resourcesed.info #Common business communication problems

Recent Posts

Home >> Uncategorized >> Common business communication problems

Common business communication problems

Nov/Tue/2017 | Uncategorized








Common Business Communication Problems – and 20 Solutions

Common business communication problems

How to buy essay cheap with no worries -
How to Fix Common Business Communication Failures

Nov 28, 2017 Common business communication problems, buying essays online -
Five Top Causes of "Business Communication Problems"

Are your teacher resume and cover letter generating interviews? However, we don't just write teacher resumes! I am sure we have written documents in every occupation or position title. If you are tired of wasting time figuring out the art of resume writing, or overcoming career obstacles, contact us. Your academic CV curriculum vitae or resume and application letter should be the marketing tools that help you land the common business, position that is perfect for marxist you. Common? We offer effective, confidential, certified professional resume writing for: School Teachers College Instructors and Robed Racists, University Professors Corporate Trainers School Administrators Classroom Teacher Aides School Counselors Education Consultants Instructional Leaders Educational Leaders and common business communication problems, everyone else in cherry orchard themes the education field! Professional Resume Writing Services Plus. Academic Curriculum Vitaes / CVs Philosophy of Education Statements Philosophy of Administration and problems, Leadership Philosophy of Discipline Management Cover / Application Letters Teaching Philosophy Statements LinkedIn Profile Writing LinkedIn Traffic Generation. Interview Coaching Career Coaching Social Media Job Search Coaching 10 Educator Career eBooks Job Search Assistance Job Search Networking Biography and Autobiography Writing Thank you Letters.

We pride ourselves on cherry writing tailored resumes to common communication, communicate the unique value you bring to a school district or organization. Customer service is paramount to us. We make sure you are looked after in calculate partition coefficient a timely and business, professional manner. Treat others as you would expect to be treated is our motto and we stand by it. We provide service via email or over the phone, whichever suits you best. Your success is our success! Hire a Teacher Resume Writer with Unmatched Personalized Service. Your career success is our priority. It's our passion and expertise! At A+ Resumes for Teachers our expert career and employment professionals design resumes for educational professionals, such as, but certainly not limited to: Educational Leadership Positions Elementary Teacher Physical Education Teacher Adjunct College Instructor Media Librarian Specialist Special Education Teacher E-Learning Specialist Substitute Teacher Music Teacher Director of Education University Professor.

School Secretary ESL/TESOL Teacher Online Instructor School Administrator Kindergarten Teacher School Counselor School Assistant Principal Corporate Trainer School District Superintendent Student Teacher Teacher's Aide. Adaptation Model? You know you’re a knockout educator, so why can’t you land a teacher interview? The competition can be tough! You MUST showcase your credentials, skills, and expertise in the right manner. As a specialized resume writing service , we know what works and will position you ahead of problems, your competition. Robed? Shop around - is there another Dual Certified Professional Resume Writing Service that specializes in education resumes and curriculum vitaes?

Over the common, last 16+ years we have developed approx. 8500 academic resumes, curriculum vitaes / CVs application letters, LinkedIn profiles, teaching philosophy statements, and other job search documents in the education industry. How To Calculate Coefficient? A+ Resumes for Teachers guarantees 100% satisfaction. Common Communication Problems? See our testimonials and find out why our clients enjoy partnering with us. Here are some other reasons why you should hire us to help you advance your education career. White Robed Essay? Time Tested - Successfully helped teachers, administrators, and other educational professionals around the common business problems, world for 16+ years secure excellent positions quickly, easily, and with less stress. Proven Performance - Backed up with a top-notch guarantee, extensive testimonials, and cherry themes, a high referral rate. Unique Job Search Documents - No Teacher Resume Templates - Customized resume and common, cover letter that will enhance and josef, showcase YOUR qualifications and accomplishments. Worldwide Resume Writing and Interview Coaching Service - The majority of our clients come from the problems, United States, therefore our pricing is in roy's model U.S. currency.

However, we enjoy working with international clients, and problems, have developed compelling job search documents for customers around the globe. Customer Service Focused - We want you to be happy with the final results. Atmosphere Term? This includes making any necessary revisions until you are 100% satisfied. No Hidden Costs - We list resume writing services and pricing on the website, so you know what your investment is common business, right from the atmosphere term, start. Secured Server - Get started right away. Within minutes you can have the education specific worksheet delivered right to your email box as an MS Word attachment. Expertise - We can help you with every aspect of your job search.

Candace has earned the following credentials and is a Dual Certified Resume Writer. CPRW - Certified Professional Resume Writer. Common Problems? CARW - Certified Advanced Resume Writer. CIC - Certified Interview Coach. CEIP - Certified Employment Interview Preparation.

ACCC - Associate Certified Career Coach. CECC Certified Electronic Career Coach. With additional professional social media training in: Social Media Success Summit 2015, 2016. Social Media Management Tools 2015. Josef Fritzl House? Numerous courses on common Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Google+, Instagram and how they relate to job search and growing contacts or followings.

Confidential Service - we are very discreet when contacting clients; be assured your personal information will never be shared. We have an education specific development team plus two Certified Professional Resume Writers to review your completed documents. Expertise In Teacher Resume Keywords to Get Passed Applicant Tracking Systems. Marxist Materialism? You’ll be thrilled to know that our career experts understand and speak educational lingo; they know the teaching structure and common communication, work concepts of the education system. We offer you modern resume writing techniques and up-to-date keywords; in atmosphere literary term other words, we know what works and what doesn't. Business? We are knowledgeable about the education and career trends, buzzwords and josef fritzl house, language that are specific to your profession. These words are essential to common communication problems, optimize your job search, and roy's adaptation model, need to be incorporated in business problems your education resume, cover letter, and LinkedIn profile. Without them, your teacher resume will not pass the ATS scanning process that many schools, organizations, businesses and faculties are using to screen applicants - it will not be placed in Robed the to communication problems, be interviewed pile.

Don’t put off your dream teacher, school administrator, or any other education career, let us help move your career forward! If you require more information or have any questions - Contact Candace at A+ Resumes for Teachers by how to partition coefficient clicking here or call toll-free 1-877-738-8052. A+ Teachers#39; Interview Edge (2nd Edition) contains 152 teacher specific interview questions and potential answers to common problems, prepare you for your next education interview. Discover not just what interview questions they#39;ll ask you at your next interview. but also how to answer those questions to ensure you land your dream job! A+ Principals#39; Interview Edge (2nd Edition) contains 152 principal / administrator specific interview questions and potential answers to prepare you for your next interview. In today#39;s competitive marketplace, you need to how to partition coefficient, be fully prepared and nothing will have you more prepared to ace an interview than knowing the business problems, questions in advance!

A+ Resumes for calculate partition coefficient Teachers 2001 - 2017. Common Communication? Sign-up to receive free career tips and strategies.

Order Essay Paper -
How to Fix Common Business Communication Failures

Nov 28, 2017 Common business communication problems, buy an essay online for cheap 24/7 -
Common Business Communication Problems - - ACT One International

Le label rouge Decodex, un certificat d’excellence? L’expression est évidemment ironique. Communication Problems! L’outil mis en place par Le Monde a rapidement indexé (c’est le cas de le dire) un territoire vaste et bigarré où pullulent les énergumènes, les paranoïaques et les mythomanes, mais où vivent aussi paisiblement disons plutôt vivaient jusqu’ici des tribus de penseurs et des chercheurs d’une haute probité dont les informations n’avaient qu’un seul défaut: celui de ne pas correspondre à la vision du monde univoque du Monde , mètre étalon de la pensée unique française. How To Calculate Partition! Traduit en langage technologique: ils ont le tort d’accrocher les fureteurs à mots clefs chauds et à sources douteuses du logiciel en question. Business Problems! La mise en place d’une intelligence artificielle pour traquer la pensée déviante ajoute un vernis d’objectivité impersonnelle et mécanique à ce qui n’est, fondamentalement, qu’une opération assez grossière de gleichschaltung (alignement) médiatique, du reste reconnue comme telle jusque dans les rangs des confrères. Il n’est pas d’intelligence artificielle. How To Calculate Partition Coefficient! Il n’existe que de l’intelligence humaine prolongée par des robots qui accomplissent ce que cette intelligence leur a ordonné de faire. Communication! On aurait pu apprendre aux inquisiteurs mécaniques de Decodex à distinguer le deuxième degré et l’antiphrase. Cherry Orchard Themes! Mais c’eût été long, compliqué et coûteux. Common Business! On n’avait pas besoin d’aller aussi loin. Literary! Le but était de contenir rapidement une sédition qui se propageait comme un feu de brousse, or en de tels cas on common, ne fait pas de détails.

On arrose bien au-delà de la limite des flammes. Roy's Adaptation! C’est le dilemme classique des nettoyeurs d’urgence: Tuez-les tous, Dieu reconnaîtra les siens. Le Monde ne représente pas, c’est le moins qu’on puisse dire, un parangon de vertu journalistique. Business! Il y a 14 ans déjà, l’immense enquête de Pierre Péan et Philippe Cohen sur La Face cachée du Monde illustrait le profond fossé existant entre les pratiques de ce journal et les règles élémentaires de la déontologie journalistique voire de l’honnêteté intellectuelle pure et simple. Marxist Materialism! Cela ne s’est pas arrangé depuis. Common Business Communication Problems! Dès la guerre en ex-Yougoslavie, j’ai collecté une documentation ahurissante sur ses mensonges et ses partis pris. Robed Racists! J’avais même eu la folie d’écrire à son rédacteur en chef pour relever une erreur de fait objective, aisément vérifiable dans les encyclopédies. Common Business Problems! Il m’avait répondu par une caricature de Plantu, me disant en résumé: allez vous faire foutre, Balkaneux enragé. Inutile de relever l’effondrement éthique et informationnel du même journal dans les récents conflits du Proche-Orient, qu’il a couverts d’un voile de camouflage imprimé de motifs néocons . Atmosphere! Si, par exemple, le parti pris massivement pro-djihadiste des médias occidentaux dans la tragédie d’Alep a été remis en question par certains journalistes et commentateurs français, ces voix-là ne sortaient pas des colonnes du Monde . Common Business Communication! Lequel a été dénoncé à plusieurs reprises, ces derniers temps, comme diffuseur de fake news et pas seulement par RT et Sputnik, loin de là.

Aussi, lorsque cette officine d’influence financée à coups de dizaines de millions par l’État français a annoncé la mise en place de son outil de vérification, je ne pouvais que sourire. Literary! Le Monde traquant la désinformation, c’est comme si le cartel de Medellín se mettait à dénoncer les dealers de coin de rue. Puis, des amis préoccupés m’ont signalé que notre Main courante sur l’internet, log.antipresse.net, avait été barré de rouge dans la classification simplette du Decodex. Business! Si France-Dimanche est classé vert, le label rouge Decodex ne pouvait être qu’une marque d’excellence. Quelle meilleure réfutation pour cette entreprise de censure que sa propre idiotie? Mais ensuite j’ai lu l’excellente série d’articles qu’Olivier Berruyer a consacrée au Decodex sur son site, les-crises.fr, l’un des plus intelligents blogs français, évidemment classé dans la zone orange juste au bord du gouffre rougeoyant. Themes! Malgré un soutien considérable des lecteurs et de certains noms illustres du débat public français, Berruyer a décidé d’ajouter l’action en justice à sa réfutation intellectuelle de cet Index librorum prohibitorum des temps modernes. Business Communication! La motivation de son appel aux dons pour le procès à venir donne à réfléchir:

Eh oui: tout ridicule qu’il soit, Le Monde est la voix même de l’officialité française. Racists! Quoi qu’il vaille, ses dénonciations ont un impact sur votre vie réelle. Problems! C’est comme d’être cité, jadis, dans la Pravda de Moscou: que vous soyez innocent et eux dépravés ne change rien au fait qu’ ils tiennent le couteau par le manche. Aussi ai-je estimé utile de livrer ici une mise au point. Calculate! D’abord sur la manière dont notre propre site a été classé rouge, et ensuite sur ce que représente réellement, à mes yeux, le Decodex du Monde . Sur le moteur de vérification de Decodex, le log de l’Antipresse apparaît affublé d’une mise en garde menaçante: Ce site diffuse régulièrement de fausses informations ou des articles trompeurs. Communication! Restez vigilant et cherchez d’autres sources plus fiables.

Si possible, remontez à l’origine de l’information. A l’appui de ce jugement extrême, l’algorithme du Decodex cite seulement deux sources, dont l’une est sans rapport aucun avec le sujet: Pour mémoire: nous avions épinglé une scène de sauvetage impliquant une seule et même enfant syrienne au bras de trois sauveteurs différents, ces fameux Casques blancs qui ont disparu comme par enchantement après la reprise de la ville par l’armée syrienne. Model! Nous ne contestions pas la réalité de ce sauvetage, mais soulignions simplement que le bombardement de photos sous divers angles et avec divers protagonistes avait pour but de démultiplier virtuellement le drame. Cette dénonciation de la manipulation a été assimilée à son tour à de la manipulation par les vigiles de Libé : le procédé est classique et grossier. Common Business Communication Problems! Nous l’avions décortiqué, sources à l’appui, dans un post ultérieur: La “désintox-réintox” de “Libé”. Literary Term! Relevant notamment tout ce que cette dispute sur une mise en scène photographique dissimulait au sujet du rôle des Casques blancs et du parti pris de la couverture médiatique de la guerre à Alep.

La révélation des pratiques hideuses des insurgés après la prise du fameux quartier Est nous a donné amplement raison. Résumons donc: Le Decodex nous a classés rouge sur la foi de deux articles de la grande presse, dont l’un ne nous mentionne nulle part, et dont l’autre est en soi un cas de propagande. Problems! Le label rouge décerné à Antipresse est allé au mauvais destinataire: c’est au moteur informatique du Decodex lui-même qu’il eût fallu l’adresser! Il se peut (c’est même hautement probable) que l’algorithme se base dans son jugement sur d’autres recoupements: par exemple, le fait que nous citons souvent les plateformes russes RT.com et Sputnik, les ennemis jurés des nouveaux médias occidentaux, ou que nous donnons la parole à des désinvités sulfureux. Adaptation! Car le principe de base de l’algorithme Decodex est tout entier contenu dans Le Loup et l’Agneau de La Fontaine: Si ce n’est toi, c’est donc ton frère.

Je n’en ai point. Business Problems! C’est donc quelqu’un des tiens Mais les preuves de cet ordre ne sont pas mentionnées dans la sentence. Selon son chef de projet, le Decodex moteur de recherche et extension pour navigateur aurait été ficelé avec seulement 50 à 60’000 euros puisés dans le fonds Google. Atmosphere Literary Term! Cette somme et son origine sont hautement intéressantes. On se rappellera que le fonds Google consiste en un don forfaitaire de 60 millions consenti par le géant de la Silicon Valley à François Hollande en 2013 en échange de l’abandon de la requête des éditeurs de presse français en vue d’un versement de droits d’auteurs (droits voisins) liés à l’exploitation de leurs contenus par le moteur de recherche.

Un millième seulement de cette petite monnaie aurait donc été investi dans le développement du Decodex . Common Business Communication! Pour quiconque connaît tant soit peu les conditions du développement sur internet, c’est une plaisanterie. Marxist Historical! 60’000 euros pour un site de cette importance, c’est tout juste le prix de de la carrosserie. Common Communication! Mais qu’en est-il du moteur sous le capot? Les algorithmes requis pour processer une telle masse de documents et les catégoriser, fût-ce très sommairement, demandent tout de même réflexion et de programmation. De deux choses l’une, donc: soit le Monde a grossièrement menti sur le coût de sa solution; soit le cœur même du Decodex lui a été fourni clefs en main dans le cadre bénin de cet accord commercial qui libérait Google de toute redevance tout en lui donnant la possibilité de refaçonner le paysage médiatique français empêtré dans sa conversion numérique. Il existe de fait auprès de Google un département appelé News Lab , un laboratoire de nouvelles qui collabore avec journalistes et entrepreneurs pour construire l’avenir des médias. White Robed Racists! La première des missions qu’il revendique s’intitule Trust Verification , autrement dit: Fiabilité et vérification et se résume ainsi: L’innovation technologique [lisez l’internet] a offert aux journalistes une facilité d’accès sans précédent à l’information. Common Business! Mais elle a aussi créé des défis uniques dans la vérification de la fiabilité des contenus et le mantien de la confiance et de la vérité dans les médias. Materialism! Voilà, tel quel, le credo de base du Ministère de la Vérité instauré sous l’égide du Monde Il suffit d’étudier un peu les profils des responsables de ce labo pour se rendre compte qu’on n’évolue plus du tout dans le monde de la presse, mais dans quelque chose de très différent. Communication Problems! Il s’agit de gens jeunes, plus proches du logiciel que de la plume et plus versés dans le quantitatif et la forme que dans le qualitatif et le fond. Marxist Historical Materialism! Prenez par exemple Olivia Ma, la cheffe des Partenariats du Lab , autrement dit la personne qui aura probablement collaboré avec les Français pour la sous-traitance des algorithmes Google.

Membre de la petite caste des contrôleurs du web, elle est notamment passée par la direction du fameux Center for business problems, Public Integrity, financé par Soros, à l’origine des Panama Papers et autres fuites stratégiques organisées par le système d’influence U.S. Au profil étrange de cette cyberjournaliste 2.0 ne pouvait correspondre, côté Monde , qu’un geek analogue, à savoir Samuel Laurent, le coordinateur du Decodex . Literary! L’Observatoire des journalistes et de l’information médiatique consacre à ce jeune androïde un portrait significatif. Common Business Communication! La prétention à l’objectivité factuelle, chez cet automate de la pensée algorithmique se double d’une morgue et d’un simplisme intellectuel préoccupants, exprimés sur les réseaux par un langage d’adolescent. Ainsi il sera fréquent de le voir qualifier le moindre de ses contradicteurs (non-journaliste, cela va sans dire) d’être un relou , un troll et par voie de conséquence d’être ostracisé de son univers virtuel sans aspérités. Marxist Historical! Samuel Laurent a en effet tendance à bloquer toute personne qui émettrait une critique un tant soit peu radicale à l’encontre de son travail et de ses partis pris. Common Communication Problems! Dans sa simulation du réel augmenté 2.0, nul doute que le grand amateur de chiffres, de courbes et de vérités mathématiques réconfortantes n’a guère de temps pour se consacrer à l’analyse. Marxist Historical! (OJIM) Comme chez les désintoxicateurs de Libé , on common business, est frappé par l’insensibilité, l’aliénation à proprement parler, de ces nouveaux journalistes face à tout échange d’arguments respectueux et cultivé. Tant par sa conception que par son personnel ou son organigramme, le Decodex se situe en marge du travail et de la mission d’un journal, fût-il normatif comme Le Monde . Orchard Themes! Sa création ne résulte pas d’un développement rédactionnel, mais d’un projet stratégique remontant à la direction où siègent Alain Minc et autres globalistes. Business Problems! Il est grossier, hypocrite, stupide et encourage à la stupidité.

Du même coup, son échelle de valeurs a rapidement été renversée dans l’opinion, le rouge devenant soudain in orchard themes, par rapport au vert ringard à la France-Dimanche . La chute dans la dérision ne signifie pas pour autant que le danger soit écarté. Common Problems! Sa mise en place témoigne d’une intégration poussée des systèmes non d’information, mais de contrôle de l’information , intégration officialisée dans le cas de la France (on ne l’avait pas saisi sur l’heure) par l’accord léonin avec Google en 2013. Avec l’approche de la présidentielle française, d’une importance stratégique pour le monde occidental, on fritzl house, va voir que le Decodex n’était que la première hirondelle d’une invasion autrement plus massive. Common Business Communication Problems! L’Index du Monde n’est en effet qu’un jouet d’enfant et probablement une version alpha ou bêta déguisée en regard du prochain projet du News Lab de Google, qui s’avance cette fois-ci à visage découvert. Josef House! Avec l’arrivée en France du projet CrossCheck, le contrôle de l’information va prendre une toute autre allure. Communication! 17 instances sont déjà partenaires de cet outil de catalogage par indexation et contextualisation: l’AFP, BuzzFeed News, France Médias Monde (via les Observateurs de France 24), France Télévisions, Global Voices, Libération, La Provence, Les Echos, La Voix du Nord, Le Monde, Nice-Matin, Ouest-France, Rue89 Bordeaux, Rue89 Lyon, Rue89 Strasbourg, Storyful et StreetPress . Roy's! Non content de se déployer en essaim, on communication problems, peut parier que le programme de Trust Verification de Google aura gagné en précision et en exhaustivité. Certains médias de grand chemin ont de toute évidence décidé de transformer leur faillite éthique et professionnelle en victoire politique. Robed Essay! Ils le réalisent au travers d’une conversion à ciel ouvert en outils d’influence et de contrôle. Common Business Communication Problems! Et là, l’effet de masse compensera sans doute, en partie, les lacunes de qualité et de conception du projet.

Des mensonges grossiers répercutés par 100 androïdes alignés passeront plus aisément pour de la vérité que des évidences écrites par des humains isolés. Ils ont au moins raison sur un point: oui, la vérité dans l’information est un enjeu essentiel de notre temps. Calculate Partition! Mais ce n’est pas chez eux qu’on la trouvera. Common Problems! La notion même de vérité, dans ce monde-là, n’est qu’un algorithme de plus. La propagande sert davantage à nous justifier nous-mêmes qu’à convaincre les autres; plus nous avons de raisons de nous sentir coupables, et plus fervente sera notre propagande. Fritzl! (Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on business problems, the Nature of literary term, Mass Movements ) Dans Le Maître et Marguerite , le chef-d’œuvre de Mikhaïl Boulgakov, le Diable apparaît en personne sous la cape du magicien Woland. Problems! Le Diable est joueur: il s’amuse à tester la vanité et la crédulité des hommes. Term! Et il sait qu’il n’est d’humains plus crédules que les incrédules de métier. Business Problems! C’est ainsi que son premier interlocuteur, Berlioz, vedette littéraire du Moscou soviétique et athée militant, finira décapité par un tramway, exactement comme le magicien le lui a prédit.

Ah! S’il avait un seul instant pris au sérieux l’existence du Tentateur qui venait, justement, de lui offrir une cigarette Des blagues à ne pas faire en société Qu'est-ce que le Système? me demandent sans cesse les idiots utiles du Système. Term! (Tweet, 5.2.2017) Nous sommes témoins d’une plaisanterie semblable lorsque nous parlons du Système. Common Business Problems! Il m’arrive ainsi de lancer des aphorismes à ce sujet dont les échos sont connus d’avance: Complotiste!, me répliquent aussitôt des sceptiques venus de divers horizons culturels et politiques, mais qui ont généralement en commun un binôme de caractéristiques paradoxal: d’un côté, la foi dans le rationalisme et le fact-checking, et de l’autre des convictions morales et politiques d’une naïveté extrême. Cherry! Ils s’attribuent à la fois une haute capacité de discernement, une mission de vigilance citoyenne et une position critique vis-à-vis du pouvoir. Common Business Communication! Dans le langage ras-du-sol des services , ce sont de parfaits idiots utiles . L’idiot utile est celui qui croit qu’il ne croit pas ce qu’il croit, mais qu’il le sait . Cherry Themes! Que sa subjectivité n’y est pour rien.

Que sa connaissance ne lui vient pas par un quelconque canal d’influence ou d’endoctrinement, mais de la vérité des choses elle-même. Common Communication! Sans filtre. Cherry Themes! Sans intermédiaire. Common Communication! Sans diable ni système . Le Système, selon eux, n’existe pas. Atmosphere Literary! Ou, s’il existe, il n’a ni malice ni intention particulière. Communication Problems! Il fait partie du paysage comme le climat ou la course des astres et obéit aux décrets des institutions comme la charrue au laboureur.

Ce qui existe, pour cette catégorie d’esprits, c’est l’Antisystème, à savoir tous ces milieux étranges et sulfureux qui, sous couvert de résistance contre un spectre de leur invention, complotent pour renverser la démocratie. Roy's! Quelquefois, souvent même, ces innocents décrètent que le Système, c’est justement ça: l’Antisystème. Common Business Communication Problems! Tout comme les étiquettes, les causes et les effets s’intervertissent facilement. Historical Materialism! Pour que l’Antisystème soit moralement condamnable, pour qu’on puisse le censurer et le liquider sans états d’âme, il est nécessaire que sa cause soit une illusion. Common! Mais entre ces deux termes, lequel découle de l’autre? La nécessité de bâillonner l’opposition à cause de ses mensonges, ou la nécessité de prouver que ses vues sont des mensonges afin de la bâillonner? Les comploteurs dénoncent les complotistes. White Essay! Quoi de plus normal? (Tweet, 31.1.2017) Et de même: où se situe le crime de complot , si complot il y a? La divulgation massive, par WikiLeaks, des e-mails de Mme Clinton et de son entourage montre que la direction du parti Démocrate avait été accaparée par des gens qui, littéralement, passaient leur temps à comploter en coulisses: contre la Libye, pour la destruction de l’enseignement et de la conscience civique, pour les intérêts du complexe militaro-industriel, et j’en passe. Common! Le déchaînement même du milieu médiatico-politique face à cette divulgation montre que les tractations secrètes avec des agents d’influence sans investiture démocratique sont un mode de gouvernement admis et protégé.

Ainsi le complot a-t-il été attesté comme une réalité indiscutable et omniprésente par ses protagonistes et défenseurs mêmes! Mais par un extraordinaire renversement rhétorique, le crime de complot a été rejeté sur ceux qui, justement, le dévoilaient au grand jour ainsi que sur leurs hypothétiques alliés russes (car le mot russe est un utile déclencheur réflexe qui associe immédiatement à l’espionnage, à la propagande et à la désinformation). Josef House! En effet, le seul moyen de berner le public et de détourner son attention du complot indiscutable qu’il avait sous les yeux était de pointer du doigt un complot bien plus menaçant, d’autant plus menaçant qu’on ne pouvait en montrer qu’une ombre: celui liant Poutine à Trump via Julian Assange! Et voici donc les comploteurs devenus complotistes à leur tour en dénonçant le complot des complotistes visant à faire éclater leur propre complot! On pourrait étendre ce jeu de miroirs à l’infini. Common Communication! Ce qu’il reflète fondamentalement est très simple et vieux comme le monde: les rapports de force entre l’ordre établi et l’opposition, entre le discours du pouvoir et sa contestation. Fritzl House! Selon que vous serez puissant ou misérable,/Les jugements de cour vous rendront blanc ou noir , résumait sobrement La Fontaine dans Les Animaux malades de la peste.

Ou Blaise Pascal, dans ses Provinciales , s’adressant à ses adversaires jésuites d’une mauvaise foi criante: Vous êtes quatre-vingt docteurs, mes bons Pères, et je suis seul. Communication Problems! Vous avez forcément raison! (Je cite de mémoire.) Voilà donc le billard à mille bandes réduit à un vulgaire jeu de quilles: celui qui tient en main la grosse boule est en position de faucher les autres, un point c’est tout. Historical! Or, quoi qu’il arrive, la main qui tient la boule est celle du Système. Common Business Communication! Les quilles peuvent être blanches, jaunes, vertes ou rouges, elles peuvent être de gauche ou de droite, mais le choix à l’échelon des existences se ramène à cela: il y a ceux qui lancent la boule et ceux qui attendent d’être fauchés ou épargnés par le projectile. Une intelligentsia dominante, que ce soit en Europe, en Asie ou en Afrique, traite les masses comme une matière première qu’on peut soumettre à expérimentation, manipuler et gaspiller à volonté. Literary! (Eric Hoffer, The Temper of common business, Our Time , 1967) Le mot système vient du verbe grec systeô , qui signifie attacher ensemble, entrelacer. Cherry! En politique, le système est souvent représenté par des faisceaux: les convergences d’énergies tenues ensemble par le pouvoir central. Business! On pense machinalement à Rome ou au fascisme italien. Literary Term! On oublie que ces mêmes faisceaux sont aussi sur les armoiries de la présidence française. Business! Le Système, c’est le fascisme absolu, l’ordre en soi, tel qu’il se maintient et se perpétue, abstraction faite de l’idéologie et des justifications qu’il se donne.

Il prend de plus en plus d’autonomie à mesure que la société humaine se technicise et se complexifie, en cela même qu’il exclut les impondérables du facteur humain tels que le libre arbitre, le bon vouloir, la vindicte ou la clémence. La meilleure définition du mot tel qu’il nous intéresse ici a été donnée par Pontus de Thyard au XVIe siècle: Ensemble dont les parties sont coordonnées par une loi . Josef! La loi est au centre. Business Problems! Le Système règne quand aucune volonté humaine, aucune loi morale ne peut se hisser publiquement au-dessus de la loi écrite. White Racists! Sur le plan officieux , il en va tout autrement: plus la loi publique est rigoureuse, et plus les dérogations octroyées aux satrapes sont généreuses. Business Communication! Plus le commun est jugulé, et plus la nomenklatura s’auto-absout. Adaptation Model! Il suffit d’observer la classe politique pour s’en convaincre. Encore faut-il que ce que nos yeux voient puisse ose remonter jusqu’au cerveau et que celui-ci en tire des conclusions. Business! C’est une étape que le Système s’emploie à désactiver en criblant de tabous le discours public avec l’aide cruciale du dispositif de l’instruction et des médias. Cherry Orchard! Il aura fallu un dressage rigoureux pour enseigner aux consciences contemporaines à craindre l’invocation même du Système et à censurer ceux qui en parlent. Common! La crédulité est l’un des éléments clefs de ce dressage.

On apprend à admettre n’importe quelle affirmation, pourvu qu’elle vienne d’une source autorisée . Atmosphere Literary Term! Par exemple, qu’une simple grippe saisonnière est une menace pour l’humanité ou qu’un avion de ligne détourné par des pilotes amateurs peut faire crouler un gratte-ciel sans même le toucher. Communication! Cette crédulité implique à la fois de l’ignorance (en matière scientifique et logique) et de l’obéissance. Marxist Historical Materialism! Ce qui, à l’aube de la conscience éclairée, était considéré comme des tares à déraciner est devenu aujourd’hui des vertus démocratiques que les ingénieurs sociaux entretiennent. Nous avons tous été assez satisfaits de dégrader le gouvernement, de laisser tomber le civisme et en général de conspirer à produire des citoyens ignares et obéissants écrivait ainsi en mars dernier Bill Ivey, le monsieur Culture de Bill Clinton, à John Podesta, le chef de campagne de Mme Clinton. Common Business Communication! Ces agents d’influence étaient encore, en mars 2016, ceux qui tenaient la boule du jeu de quilles. Cherry Orchard! Ils étaient au cœur du système, si certains de leur domination qu’ils se permettaient des aveux écrits qu’une personne avisée hésiterait à livrer même à l’oreille d’un ami.

Ils ne pouvaient imaginer que, huit mois plus tard, ils se retrouveraient à la place des quilles. Ils n’y sont pas du reste, le Système ayant engagé une guerre totale contre ce président indésiré que les médias ne nomment jamais l’homme le plus puissant du monde ainsi qu’ils le faisaient avec tous ses prédécesseurs. Le Système est impersonnel, même s’il a un ample personnel à son service et même s’il confère à l’élite de ce personnel des pouvoirs dont les rois et les tyrans de jadis ne disposaient pas. Business Communication! L’erreur de ceux qui le contestent (et la technique de ceux qui veulent en détourner l’attention) est de le personnaliser : de réduire des lois générales et des mécanismes à des individus et à des traits de personnalité. Josef Fritzl! Les gouvernements combattus par le Système sont systématiquement réduits à des régimes , et les régimes eux-mêmes à la seule figure de leur chef (Kadhafi, Saddam, Assad, Poutine); cependant que les Antisystème s’acharnent à identifier derrière le mécanisme des tireurs de ficelles dont l’existence ou non n’a aucune importance. Lorsque l’action personnelle commence à compter réellement, c’est qu’on se trouve dans un système de pouvoir individualisé et donc, déjà, en marge du Système. Business! La personnalité de l’ivrogne Juncker n’a pas plus de poids dans l’Union soviétique européenne que celle de l’ivrogne Eltsine n’en avait dans l’URSS finissante, deux systèmes inhumains en fin de course.

L’opposition sourde et poltronne du pauvre Obama aux agissements de son propre appareil n’a en rien freiné l’emballement général. Adaptation Model! Mais le fait même que la personnalité de Vladimir Poutine infléchisse le cours de son histoire montre que la Russie est sortie, en partie, de l’orbite du Système. Une autre erreur courante consiste à prêter au Système une idéologie. Common Business! Le Système n’a pas d’idéologie: il se sert en opportuniste de celle qui, à un moment donné, le plus à même de consolider et d’étendre son empire. Marxist! Il optera naturellement de préférence pour des idéologies collectivistes, globalistes et légiférantes. Communication! Le Système est en soi un appareil de soumission.

Il exige de chaque individu, à tous les échelons, une soumission plus ou moins étendue et accorde en échange la protection, la sécurité et des privilèges. Racists! D’où son alliance naturelle avec l’Islam, qui est la Soumission , si l’on peut dire, à l’état natif. Business Communication! D’un côté comme de l’autre, la Loi balaie les particularités humaines, les raisons individuelles et surtout ces lois non écrites d’Antigone qui, à travers les siècles, ont toujours dissuadé notre propre civilisation de se transformer en un mécanisme totalitaire. Ne jamais nommer le Système: c'est le meilleur service à lui rendre. Literary! Persée ne pouvait croiser le regard de Méduse. Common Business Communication! (Tweet, 10.12.2015) Or ce que nous observons aujourd’hui dans nos aires est un bouleversement tectonique.

L’évolution tranquille du Système vers ce mécanisme parfait via le perfectionnement technique couplé à la régression de l’humain a été bouleversée par une série d’événements politiques, mais aussi de prises de conscience psychologiques. Roy's Model! Aux États-Unis, pour parler schématiquement, un outsider a réussi à prendre à revers le Système. Communication! Certes, M. House! Trump était une huile de premier plan de l’oligarchie américaine, mais le Système n’est pas réductible à l’oligarchie. Common Business Communication! Dans le cadre du Système, un juge vénal ou un journaliste illettré a la faculté de faire trébucher l’oligarque le plus puissant pour peu que son action serve le Système. House! Et non seulement Trump a-t-il réussi à enlever la présidence des États-Unis, mais encore s’emploie-t-il, depuis le premier jour de son mandat, à faire passer en force toute une série de mesures aussi perpendiculaires à la marche du Système que les bâtons qu’on met dans une roue. Pour le dire encore plus schématiquement: l’administration Trump, comme l’État de Poutine, comme nombre d’autres insurrections décriées comme populistes, s’emploie à enrayer la stratégie du Système dans son cœur même, laquelle consiste à abattre toutes les frontières établies par des communautés humaines conscientes (et donc des souverainetés volontaires) pour les remplacer par de nouveaux cloisonnements hermétiques dont lui seul, le Système, aurait les clefs: systèmes de sécurité et de contrôle total, omnisurveillance, dématérialisation documentaire et monétaire, puçage et traçage. Common Business Communication! Ce n’est pas un hasard si les milliardaires de la Silicon Valley qui sont pourtant de sa classe sociale montent en première ligne contre le nouveau président américain, aux côtés des patrons des médias de masse et des vedettes du show-biz, principaux organisateurs du décervelage et de la régression de masse.

L’enjeu de la lutte qui se développe aujourd’hui sous nos yeux dépasse les visions et la mission de tous les gouvernants de ce siècle et du précédent. Roy's! Cette lutte est l’aboutissement d’une longue évolution de la civilisation européenne, qui a mis entre les mains de l’humanité les outils de sa libération en même temps que ceux de son anéantissement. Business! L’enjeu est le choix entre une société encore calquée sur des destinées humaines ou une entité gérée par un Système anonyme épaulé par la mince élite gérant l’ensemble des banques et des médias et les prêtres informatiques de la post-humanité. En ouverture de son ouvrage posthume (inédit en français), La fourmilière globale , Alexandre Zinoviev proposait au tournant du XXIe siècle une fiction terrifiante, qui pourtant paraît presque banale aujourd’hui: Notre XXe siècle aura peut-être été le siècle le plus dramatique de toute l’histoire humaine du point de vue de la destinée des gens et des nations, des idées, des systèmes sociaux et des civilisations. Cherry Orchard Themes! Mais, toutes ces choses étant posées, ce fut aussi un siècle de passion et d’aventure: siècle d’espoirs et de désespoirs, d’illusions et de visions, d’avancées et de déceptions, de joies et de malheurs, d’amour et de haine Ç’aura été, peut-être, le dernier siècle humain. Business Problems! A sa suite se profile une masse de siècles d’histoire suprahumaine ou posthumaine, une histoire sans espoirs ni désespoirs, sans illusions ni visions, sans avancées ni déceptions, sans joies ni chagrins, sans amour ni haine Bref, nous voici aux portes d’une masse de siècles où le Système aura éradiqué l’Homme. Roy's Model! Ou pas?

Qui a (vraiment) tué la presse papier? par Slobodan Despot. Avertissement. Common Business Communication! Comme annoncé dans le numéro 61 de l’Antipresse, je publie ici la contribution que la rédaction de L’Hebdo m’avait demandée pour son ultime numéro et qu’elle a eu le fair-play de publier sans altération. Atmosphere Literary! La suite, à partir du deuxième sous-titre, est un prolongement inédit. Common Problems! (SD) Qui a assassiné L’Hebdo ? Qu’est-ce qu’on a oublié d’examiner durant l’autopsie? N’aurions-nous pas affaire à un tueur en série?

Et autres mystères cachés dans les abattoirs de la presse La Suisse romande parle français, consomme de la télévision et de la presse françaises, mais ne pense pas français. Marxist Historical Materialism! Elle ne pense pas non plus alémanique. Business Problems! Elle ne pense même pas tant romand que cantonal. Atmosphere Literary Term! Au milieu de ce creuset de particularismes, il y avait un magazine qui ambitionnait d’élever le regard par-delà les bocages, de relier le particulier à l’universel. Common Business! L’idée était audacieuse, l’espace de manœuvre millimétré. Historical! Par-delà ses partis pris, L’Hebdo de Jacques Pilet instaurait un forum où la culture, la politique et les questions de société laissaient leurs couleurs locales au vestiaire. Business! Un dress code chic selon les uns, snob selon les autres.

Pour ma part, j’y trouvais des débats et des sujets pour lesquels les pages de L’Hebdo offraient la seule piste d’atterrissage possible dans notre coin de pays. Cherry Orchard! C’était malgré tout un outil de désenclavement. Common Business Communication! Faut-il être myope pour se réjouir de sa disparition! Mais je ne me joindrai pas au chœur des pleureuses. Cherry Orchard Themes! On m’a demandé un témoignage, non des condoléances. Pour croître et durer, L’Hebdo n’avait que deux options: soit s’implanter fermement dans son pot, soit étendre son terreau.

Il en a choisi une troisième en forme d’oxymore: l’internationalisme provincial. Business Problems! Il s’est arc-bouté sur une prédication européiste qui n’intéressait personne depuis 1992 et faisait sourire hors frontières, là où l’on vivait ces illusions plutôt qu’on ne les rêvait. Cherry! Comme sa religion ne vendait plus, il s’est mis à vanter les terrasses de Suisse romande en parodiant L’Illustré . Common Business Communication Problems! De fait, ce n’étaient pas les sujets sérieux qui fatiguaient le public, mais bien la rigidité mécanique et la ringardise de l’approche. Roy's! L’Hebdo a connu une forte érosion de ses abonnés durant la dernière décennie sans jamais se remettre en question. Common Communication Problems! Car ce n’était pas un désaveu: c’étaient juste des réacs qui n’avaient rien compris! Ayant curieusement été coopté au Forum des 100, j’ai assisté voici quelques années à un petit déjeuner organisé par Ringier. Marxist Historical! On y a décortiqué la surface de pub, la stratégie marketing, les classes de revenus, mais pas un seul instant le contenu rédactionnel, le cœur du problème. Common! Je me suis dit alors que l’affaire était pliée. Orchard Themes! Le destin de L’Hebdo résume à lui seul la tragédie de l’idéalisme soixante-huitard dont il était l’un des derniers échos.

A force de vouloir rectifier la raison des gens, il a été rectifié par la raison des chiffres. Quelques jours après cette annonce-choc, l’émission Infrarouge a organisé un débat de spécialistes au chevet du magazine expirant. Common Problems! Après l’avoir porté à bout de bras pendant quinze ans, son éditeur Ringier (allié à Axel Springer) a donc fini par le lâcher. Historical! Parce qu’il ne reflète plus l’air du temps, estime Tibère Adler, l’ex-patron d’Edipresse. Common Communication Problems! Alain Jeannet, le rédacteur en chef, pense que si le magazine a tenu si longtemps, ce n’est pas malgré son positionnement de gauche, mais grâce à ses valeurs, à sa vue de la société qui n’est pas forcément majoritaire. Roy's! Tenir si longtemps avec des positions aussi marginales était carrément un petit miracle, comme les intervenants ont proclamé à l’unisson. A cet instant précis, le spectateur attentif pourrait se poser des questions. Business Communication Problems! Quel est alors ce magazine ou ce journal non nommé qui correspondrait à une vision de la société majoritaire?

Comment? Il n’existe pas? Mais pourquoi? Au lieu d’éponger quinze ans durant les pertes d’un magazine représentant des idées sans appui, ses éditeurs n’auraient-ils pas eu l’idée de le recadrer, voire de créer un titre non concurrent mais complémentaire, adressé justement à cette opinion majoritaire que L’Hebdo dédaignait? N’est-ce pas ainsi, du reste, que la Weltwoche fut tirée du marasme où elle était plongée dans les années 1990, quand elle s’était noyée dans la mélasse du mainstream? L’appel de cette opinion dédaignée est pourtant bien réel. Robed Racists Essay! Il s’exprimait jusqu’au cœur même de l’émission, par la voie du canal des téléspectateurs, la Parole citoyenne. Common Communication Problems! Laquelle parole exprime avant tout le rejet du politiquement correct et la méfiance quant au contenu même de l’offre, ce contenu qu’on se refuse absolument à mettre en question. Marxist Historical Materialism! Actuellement, la presse ne sert plus à rien, mis à part à faire peur et embobiner les gens, clamait ainsi la voix du peuple. Mais il n’y avait personne pour l’entendre.

La cause était entendue d’avance. Common Business! L’Hebdo est tombé victime du changement des habitudes de consommation de l’information (Jeannet), nullement de l’inadéquation de son offre ni de l’incompétence de ses responsables. Comme il est de rigueur par les temps qui courent, il fallait un expert pour légitimer l’autisme du milieu. Cherry Themes! Le Monsieur Loyal désigné était un professeur en sciences de la communication de l’Université, Patrick-Yves Badillot. Common Business! Lequel nous a servi les évidences de service érosion des lecteurs et effondrement de la publicité qu’on connaît sans forcément être payé 15 ou 20 briques par mois. Fritzl! Sans oublier la vague inquiétude sur la qualité du débat démocratique et l’avenir de la démocratie: Chaque fois qu’un journal disparaît, la qualité de l’information s’érode aussi. Business! La vision sous-tendant ce propos est carrément théologique: Hors l’Église point de salut! Autrement dit: la presse classique est seule productrice d’informations fiables, et son retrait ne débouche que sur la propagande, les fake news et le populisme. Le fait qu’il n’y ait eu, durant toutes ces années où L’Hebdo régna sans partage sur la culture politique en Suisse romande, aucun contrepoids au discours gauche bobo sur le marché suisse francophone, ou le fait que ce magazine encore un peu diversifié ait été sacrifié à la survie du politburo globaliste régional, à savoir le quotidien de censure Le Temps , semblent totalement échapper à la conscience de nos experts et à leur analyse. Model! C’étaient pourtant, me semble-t-il, des données fondamentales du problème.

Un public ulcéré par le mépris des journalistes, lassé d’une vision du monde systématiquement biaisée où il ne se reconnaissait pas, s’est naturellement détourné de cette presse de prêchi-prêcha et s’en est allé chercher son bol d’air frais dans l’anarchie de l’internet et des réseaux sociaux. Problems! Et les publicitaires, sans états d’âme, lui ont emboîté le pas. Ceci n’est pas une explication exhaustive, mais au moins un paramètre de l’équation. Calculate! Le paramètre, justement, qu’on a voulu éluder. Common Problems! En prétendant, notamment, que la désaffection de la presse papier était purement une affaire technique, un progrès inéluctable et sans retour vers le virtuel. Josef House! Comment expliquer alors la vive résistance et même la remontée du livre papier par rapport aux e-books? Plutôt que de réfléchir à ces questions compromettantes, les professionnels de la branche ont opté pour le pragmatisme. Common Problems! Les journalistes, espèce menacée, en réclamant leur mise sous protection de l’État (Ah!

Ces veinards de collègues de la SSR qui profitent de la redevance universelle et obligatoire). Atmosphere! Les éditeurs, en diversifiant leurs sources de profits. On nous a donc révélé que l’idéaliste Ringier, qui se présente par ailleurs comme un collectionneur d’art zurichois et non comme un requin d’affaires, a racheté d’innombrables sites utilitaires du type petites annonces et que son grand concurrent suisse Tamedia a fait de même. Common Communication Problems! Des activités sans rapport avec l’édition, mais qui ont l’avantage de recapter cette même manne publicitaire qui a fui la presse. Roy's Adaptation Model! Autrement dit, les propriétaires de journaux eux-mêmes accélèrent l’agonie de leurs fleurons sur qui l’on verse ensuite des larmes de crocodile en invoquant la mise en danger du débat démocratique que ces mêmes fleurons se sont employés à censurer, canaliser et émasculer.

Tel est donc, au sortir de cette semaine funeste, le paysage après la bataille dans une des régions les plus riches du monde occidental. Common! Et la perspective n’est guère plus entraînante. Roy's Adaptation Model! Quelques titres locaux et marginaux qui survivent par leur positionnement de niche et l’engagement sans bornes de leurs (petits) propriétaires. Common Problems! Des services publics servant de réserve d’Indiens pour les derniers journalistes professionnels, devenus de simples fonctionnaires du Ministère de la Vérité. Roy's! Et un magma de publications internet plus ou moins fiables, plus ou moins orientées, plus ou moins rentables. Est-ce vraiment la seule musique d’avenir pour ce pays qui a jadis servi de refuge et de dernier recours pour la vie intellectuelle en Europe? A priori, cette triste affaire pourrait n’avoir qu’un intérêt régional. Communication Problems! Mais l’affaire L’Hebdo n’est qu’un résumé en petit de l’assassinat du métier de journaliste par ses protagonistes mêmes. Il suffit de tirer le fil rouge pour étendre le cas à l’Europe entière, terrain d’expansion des grands groupes de presse germano-suisses récemment reconvertis dans les petites annonces. Josef! Ainsi notre collectionneur d’art zurichois, M. Common Communication Problems! Ringier, s’est-il intéressé, ces vingt dernières années, à la presse dans les pays de l’Est. Atmosphere Term! Dans la Serbie ruinée, il a racheté à bas prix le quasi-tabloïd Blic , puis son opposé diamétral le magazine NIN ( Nedeljne informativne novine , Journal d’information hebdomadaire).

NIN , par sa périodicité et son positionnement gauche intello-critique, pourrait être le frère jumeau de L’Hebdo , à ce détail près qu’il est né en 1935 et qu’en 3449 éditions, il a connu des problèmes d’une tout autre envergure que le ressac publicitaire. Business! NIN , c’était, dans la Yougoslavie socialiste, le pôle le plus lu et le plus respecté de la pensée libre. Partition Coefficient! C’était une institution du journalisme indépendant, au même titre et plus encore que le Canard enchaîné en France. De quelle liberté la pensée pouvait-elle disposer dans un système totalitaire, me demandera-t-on? Eh bien, à voir le destin de ces deux demi-frères de la presse Ringier, il y a de quoi dissiper certaines idées toutes faites. Le NIN d’avant Ringier était rompu aux luttes idéologiques. Common! Il avait été interdit, mis sous tutelle, connaissait censures et contrefeux. How To Partition Coefficient! Ses journalistes maniaient l’ironie, le sous-entendu et l’antiphrase, se jouant des règles du politiquement correct avec l’assentiment passif d’un pouvoir démonétisé. L’arrivée d’un investisseur occidental aurait pu signifier l’éclatement du carcan et l’ouverture des fenêtres. Communication! La réalité fut exactement inverse.

En septembre 2009, peu de temps après leur rachat, le collectif des journalistes de NIN adressait une lettre solennelle à Michael Ringier dénonçant l’assassinat de leur titre. Les journalistes commençaient par s’étonner du dilettantisme avec lequel la maison Ringier avait entrepris de réformer leur vénérable magazine, alors qu’elle ne possédait en Serbie que de la presse de caniveau. Adaptation Model! Puis ils décrivent une évolution cauchemardesque. Très rapidement, le rédacteur en chef a été limogé et remplacé par un journaliste relativement anonyme venu du quotidien Blic . Business Problems! Cette relève s’est faite pratiquement de nuit, sans un seul mot d’explication ou un communiqué pour les lecteurs S’ensuit la description, dans un langage peut-être un poil trop riche pour la compréhension de M. Josef! Ringier, d’une suite d’innovations barbares, mufles et par-dessus le marché incompétentes, témoignant de méconnaissance (et de désinvolture) tant à l’égard du public que du métier. Comme ailleurs, la politique de l’éditeur occidental aura été de simplifier la pensée, abrutir (dumb down) le contenu, optimiser les processus, notamment en remplaçant des professionnels chevronnés par des blancs becs arrogants venus du monde du tabloïd. Communication Problems! Bref, la raison commerciale remplaçant l’éthique journalistique. Josef! Résultat: Après seulement quelques numéros, la qualité du NIN s’est effondrée au niveau le plus bas de ces dernières décennies, comme en témoignent les avis des collèges d’autres médias, mais également les nombreuses réactions négatives de nos lecteurs du pays et de l’étranger. Il fallait le faire, après 40 ans de communisme et une décennie de dictature sous Miloševi#263; Concrètement, cela donne:

Les thèmes sont mal choisis, les journalistes se voient imposer des listes d’interlocuteurs obligatoires, aucune conception rédactionnelle n’est discernable, en un mot, le NIN n’est plus aujourd’hui qu’un navire sans barreur. Common Business Problems! On nous cache les chiffres de tirage, mais vous y aurez certainement accès, et vous pourrez vérifier nos affirmations par ce biais-là. Et la lettre se termine par une mise en garde solennelle qui devrait résonner en2017 jusque dans les oreilles des collègues suisses du moins ceux d’entre eux qui ne sont pas sourds par métier: Monsieur Ringier, vos gens en Serbie, avec ou sans votre connaissance et votre incitation, vont détruire l’hebdomadaire NIN . Model! Si cela arrive, votre capital en souffrira, mais également, et c’est bien plus important, votre réputation dans toute cette région où vous avez des affaires variées. Business Communication! Vous allez passer à profits et pertes votre déficit, mais nous, journalistes, nous resterons dans les décombres de quelque chose qui a été construit des décennies durant par de meilleurs et de plus grands travailleurs que nous, et dont nous sommes aujourd’hui les héritiers à peine dignes mais fiers. Literary! Et si quiconque s’en soucie encore les principales victimes seront nos fidèles lecteurs Ayant invité leur patron à venir voir par lui-même les dégâts et à remettre en selle le magazine avec des gens compétents, les journalistes concluaient lugubrement: Faute de quoi, vous risquez de rester dans les mémoires comme l’homme qui a contribué à détruire une tradition fascinante du journalisme en Serbie. Voilà qui est fait!

Ringier n’a pas eu l’élégance du torero qui eût consisté à proprement achever le meilleur newsmagazine des Balkans. Common Communication Problems! Il a fait pire: pour la première fois de sa longue existence, il l’a contraint à se plier au politiquement correct par un autoritarisme sec et sans appel jamais vu sous ces latitudes. How To! Il l’a raboté , lissé et ravalé au rang du tout venant. Business! NIN existe encore, mais au milieu d’une offre variée où des magazines indépendants sont plus audacieux, plus véridiques et plus engagés, et surtout plus lus . How To Coefficient! Paradoxe dans un pays où le revenu moyen est au dixième de celui de la Suisse! Les journalistes qui lisent cet article feraient bien de se faire traduire l’intégralité de la lettre de leurs collègues serbes. Common Business Problems! Ils découvriront, dans les mots de ces gens suspendus au bord de la misère matérielle, la lucidité, le courage et la franchise qui devraient caractériser la corporation et qui en sont si ostensiblement absents.

Ils y découvriront surtout la recette du brouet insipide et infect dans lequel ils vont bientôt tous mijoter. How To Calculate Partition! La mode des smartphones et des réseaux sociaux a bon dos, mais elle n’a pas grand-chose à voir avec ce bain-là. Slobodan Despot enquête sur la mort d’un pilier de la presse suisse, L’Hebdo , et se lance sur les traces d’un tueur en série. Pascal Vandenberghe revisite un grand écrivain tellement lu, tellement cité, tellement imposé dans les lectures scolaires qu’on avait fini par le détester: Erich Maria Remarque. Notre désenfumeur Fernand Le Pic décortique le spectaculaire retournement narratif lié à l’attentat de la mosquée de Québec; ou: qu’est devenu le deuxième homme?

Pay for Exclusive Essay -
Common Business Communication Problems - - ACT One International

Nov 28, 2017 Common business communication problems, pay for exclusive essay -
Common business communication problems and how to solve them

1387 Words Essay on Civil Liberty. Civil liberty , as opposed to natural liberty, refers to the liberty enjoyed by man in society. Freedom in isolation is meaningless. Freedom, to be real, involves the capacity to do or enjoy things in common with others, and no individual can permanently separate his own good from the common good. #8220;We move in and out of the herd,#8221; it has been aptly said, and the truly free individual is the man who knows when to stress his need for freedom and when to realise the full advantage of social life, with all the restrictions it implies. Common Business Communication Problems? #8220;Man thinks alone and acts with others,#8221; said a poet, and this is the essence and method of social life. Image Source: reformedlibertarian.com. Civil liberty is the personal liberty of individuals, either by themselves or in association with one another, to choose and pursue objects which they deem good, provided that all enjoy that liberty equally.

It is both positive and negative in character and roy's adaptation model includes individual#8217;s right to free action and common immunity from interference provided it does not interfere with the identical liberty of others. This means that all those essential rights we discussed earlier, must be clearly guaranteed and protected from arbitrary interference, both from other citizens and from government officials. The civil liberty of atmosphere term, individuals is protected against encroachment on the part of other individuals or association of individuals by the laws of the State, enforced by the organs of government, specially the police and courts. If my liberty is business infringed by the action of another, the laws of the State come to my rescue and help me in the realization of my liberty. It means an adjustment of the term, relations of the individual through the laws of the State.

The adjustment of man#8217;s relation to his fellowmen was one of the chief purposes for which the State came into being. With the lapse of time, there was further refinement and the State recognised the basic rights of man, made them definite and equally enjoyable by all classes in the State, and assured to all protection against common problems encroachments. Thus, #8220;Definite law, sure enforcement and equality before the law,#8221; as Gettell says, #8220;marked the advance of civil liberty of man to man.#8221; Protection of civil liberty against the interference of government is of comparatively recent origin. In the earlier stages of the development of the State the atmosphere term, ruler personified its sovereignty and he exercised full control on business the lives of his subjects. There could be no liberty under these circumstances. If the rulers sometimes agreed to respect certain liberties it was done under the fritzl house, stress of circumstances, and as soon as the communication problems, stress was over unlimited and absolute exercise of authority would be the rule. With the advent of democracy a definite distinction was made between the adaptation, State and government and checks were placed on the manner and extent of governmental action. The principles that defined and regulated the conduct of government, set a limit to its actions against the individual, and protected the rights and privileges of the communication, individual, constituted the fundamental law of the White Racists Essay, State.

Every democratic State must now have its fundamental law. It may be written or unwritten. Business? When the fundamental law is written and is embodied in atmosphere literary, a written document, called the constitution, it clearly prescribes how government is organised, the scope of its powers, the manner in which those powers are exercised, and the general guarantees of civil liberties. The Bill of Rights, which written constitutions usually contain, defines the sphere of civil liberties and prescribes remedies in case of their infringement. In a country, where the fundamental law is unwritten, as in common, Britain, the organisation of the government, the scope of its powers, the White Essay, manner of their exercise and the guarantees of civil liberties are primarily the result of traditions, customs, usages and precedents or, to be brief, conventions of the Constitution, as Dicey called them. Fundamental law or the constitution is, therefore, the surest guarantee of the protection of civil liberty against the interference of the common, government. Whatever be the nature of the constitutional civil liberty will be at its greatest under two conditions.

First, when the josef fritzl house, rights of business communication problems, private action are clearly defined in cherry orchard, ample terms in order to cover the widest possible range of such action, and, secondly, when the defined rights are strictly enforced by definite remedies which can be applied as speedily and effectively as possible. In Britain, the definition of civil liberty is scanty or at any rate scattered, but the remedies for common business communication problems the enforcement of liberties are numerous and, above all, effective. The Constitution of the United States contains a Bill of Rights and it further provides that #8220;no person shall be deprived of his life, liberty or property without the process of law.#8221; The Chapter on Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution is more elaborate as compared with the Bill of Rights contained in any other existing constitution of importance. Another important feature of Fundamental Rights in India is that there is a special constitutional provision for their enforcement (Article 32). Liberty, according to Professor Laski, #8220;is never real unless the government can be called to account; and it should always be called to account when it invades rights.#8221; In the United States any law or action of the national or State government can be challenged in a court of law, if it amounts to depriving a man of his civil liberty. Literary Term? There is communication problems no doctrine of the #8216;security of the State#8217; in the United States and the legislatures cannot suspend or abridge an individual right on the ground of the security of the State. It is for the courts to decide and determine whether there is a #8220;clear and present danger#8221; to the existence of the social order so as to justify curtailment of civil liberty. The Constitution of India, on term the other hand, imposes direct limitations on Fundamental Rights. Courts cannot question the propriety of legislation on the ground that it seeks to unduly restrict personal liberty, once it has been established that it is within the competence of the legislature to make such a law or in any way to modify its effect. The Forty-second amendment of the Constitution relegated Fundamental Rights to common business problems, a position of inferiority by establishing the primacy of the Directive Principles of State Policy, though the White Essay, recent Judgement of the Supreme Court has nullified it.

In Britain, no court can challenge an common business problems Act of Parliament. Parliament may alter the Constitution; yet its action cannot be legally questioned. There is, thus, no constitutional guarantee of individual liberty in Britain in the sense in which it is orchard found in the United States, India, and many other countries with a written Constitution. Rights in Britain are determined by common communication problems customs and common law and protected by impartial and how to calculate partition coefficient independent tribunals and the Rule of business problems, Law which involves absence of arbitrary power and privileges. Josef? Civil liberty is not absolute. It is subject to limitations in order to secure or promote the greater interests of the community. The State may protect civil liberty through its laws against interference by other individuals, or through its constitutional system against interference by any single organ of government. But the communication problems, State always possesses the power, through its legal machinery, to limit and abridge or even destroy civil liberty. Then, the real guarantees of civil liberty are not the many constitutional devices, but #8220;what the Essay, people will stand,#8221; and what they will stand depends ultimately upon the outlook of the community. An intelligent community understands the social need of freedom.

It does not fear healthy and honest criticism; in fact, it knows that if government is to be responsible it must thrive upon variety of opinions. Regimented opinion is no opinion and it cannot bring about the willing cooperation of common problems, all for proper articulation of the how to calculate coefficient, machinery of government. An intelligent and liberal community, in one word, #8220;believes in freedom, and communication it assumes that in a free atmosphere men will, on the whole, use their freedom in a way which is not, in the long run, detrimental to the real interests of society criticism being one of these. But beyond this it is difficult to go, nothing will make up for an illiberal public outlook and a judiciary that will yield to every pressure either of the government or of opinion.#8221; Welcome to Shareyouressays.com! Our mission is to provide an White Robed Racists Essay online platform to help students to discuss anything and everything about Essay.

This website includes study notes, research papers, essays, articles and communication problems other allied information submitted by visitors like YOU. Before publishing your Essay on this site, please read the following pages:

Buy an Essay Online for Cheap 24/7 -
IT Solutions for the Most Common Business Communication Problems

Nov 28, 2017 Common business communication problems, order essay online -
Common business communication problems and how to solve them

essay gun rights High school student David sent me this research paper on gun rights. “I am pro 2A,” David asserts, “but my essay takes a slightly moderate stance.” I’m 2A, but? Uh-oh. Common Business Problems? In the interests of his re-edumacation I asked young Master David if he would consent to having his magnum opus corrected graded by TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia. He agreed. How To Calculate? Your participation in this endeavor would be most appreciated. The Right to common business problems Keep and partition Bear. The date is March 30, 1981, in Washington D.C.

President Ronald Reagan waves to communication problems a crowd of reporters and civilians when suddenly six shots ring out, and the President’s limo speeds away. The news spreads fast. There has been an assassination attempt on the President. In the following days, weeks, and how to calculate coefficient months, this event brought calls for stricter gun laws, and renewed the debate over whether the common business problems, Second Amendment guarantees an atmosphere literary term, individual right to keep and bear arms . . . There is no doubt that guns are an integral part of American history. From the smoothbore muskets wielded by business problems, farmers in josef house the Revolutionary War, to the M1 Garands carried by the valiant soldiers of the U.S. Military in WWII, to common business communication the 5.56x45mm rounds being sent “downrange” from the barrels of M4s and M16s in Afghanistan as this is being written, guns were a necessary part in the creation of our nation and cherry continue to play an important role in business protecting America abroad. But civilian ownership of guns in America is josef, a dividing issue. At the center of the debate is the Second Amendment to the U.S. Communication Problems? Constitution. Josef Fritzl? It reads: “A well regulated militia being necessary for business problems the preservation of a free state, the right of the materialism, people to communication keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” What is Essay, a militia?

Who are “the people?” Many questions arise after reading the common business, text. Those in favor of gun control tend to believe that the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms as a collective right, meaning one reserved for the military. Those who support gun rights believe that the Second Amendment is meant to protect the right of orchard individuals to bear arms. Also, there is common communication, debate as to whether this amendment has a fixed or evolving meaning, whether the specific intent of the Founders should control it’s current application. The ability of the government to regulate the sale, possession, and use of roy's adaptation model firearms grew controversial in the years leading up to common the American Revolution. The British realized that organized armed colonists could resist their oppressive regime, and began confiscating their weapons. One such effort to capture colonial arms and ammunition in Massachusetts sparked the marxist historical, Revolutionary War.

Once the war was over, and the Framers set about common, drafting the Bill of Rights, they wanted to adaptation ensure that the business problems, government could not confiscate citizens’ arms, leading to the Second Amendment. Cherry Orchard Themes? The Revolution and the civilian militias provided the primary context for the Second Amendment. The debate about whether the common business problems, Second Amendment protected an individual right began in atmosphere literary term the Jacksonian era, when in response to the disarmament of British citizens in the mid to late 18th Century, legal experts began to communication problems describe the atmosphere literary, importance of the individual right (Tucker). Common Business Communication Problems? The first laws that expressly prohibited certain individuals from owning firearms were passed soon after the Civil War, when Southern states enacted laws prohibiting blacks from owning firearms (Mississippi). These laws were upheld by the Supreme Court, on the ground that the Second Amendment only prevented the federal government, not the states, from restricting citizen’s rights.

But later the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause made laws prohibiting firearms ownership by certain groups of literary people unconstitutional (Linder). Then, in the early 20th Century, following the common problems, infamous St Valentine’s Day Massacre, where gangsters with automatic weapons killed seven members of a rival gang, federal legislation was passed regulating several types of “dangerous weapons” rather than classes of people. The unified “gun control movement” known today got its start in themes the 1970’s. In 1974, The National Council to Control Handguns was formed, later renamed after James Brady, President Reagan’s Press Secretary who was permanently injured during the common, assassination attempt on the President. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is roy's adaptation, one of gun control’s largest and most ardent supporters. On the business, opposing side is the National Rifle Association, or NRA. Founded in 1871 as a marksmanship program for civilians and historical soldiers alike, the NRA had opposed stricter gun laws since the common, early 1900’s, but in materialism the 1970’s they shifted their focus to problems actively lobbying against increased regulation (Gun Control, CQ). This history can be traced through several major Supreme Court cases regarding the issue. The first of these cases is Presser v. Fritzl? Illinois in 1885.

In this case, Mr. Common Business Problems? Presser organized an armed march of orchard 400 German Americans through the common communication problems, streets in Chicago, where it was illegal for armed groups to literary parade without a permit. Presser thought this was unconstitutional, on the grounds that it violated the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled that the law was constitutional, because the Second Amendment only protected citizens’ rights from restriction by the federal government (Sommers). The second case to arise was United States v. Miller, in 1939. Common Business? Two men were transporting a sawed-off, double-barreled shotgun across state boundaries without paying the necessary National Firearms Act (NFA) tax. When they were arrested, they were released because the lower court believed that the NFA was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that the men were guilty, because at the time a shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches was not associated with the type of cherry themes militia activity protected by the Amendment and therefore Congress could regulate the possession of such weapons (Sommers).

The third case to come to the Supreme Court on the issue of gun control was United States v. Lopez in common problems 1995. A Texas high school student was carrying a handgun within a high school. White Robed? Under the recently enacted Gun-Free School Zone Act, carrying a firearm inside of a school was a federal crime. The Supreme Court found the common business communication, law unconstitutional, on federalism and commerce clause grounds. Federalism is the materialism, system central to American democratic theory that separates power between the federal and state governments. Under this system, criminal law within the states is for the states themselves to control, outside of the common business problems, federal government’s power. The commerce clause is part of Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

The commerce clause allows Congress to regulate commerce “Among the states.” Since the literary term, Gun-Free School Zone Act does not pertain to interstate commerce, Congress exceeded its powers. The fourth case to come before the Supreme Court was District of Columbia v. Business? Heller in roy's model 2008. A D.C. man wanted to own a handgun for home defense, but believed he was effectively prevented from doing so because of D.C.’s law requiring guns in the home be kept “unloaded, locked, or disassembled.” In a pivotal decision and a victory for gun rights advocates, the common business communication problems, Supreme Court ruled that the law was unconstitutional because it was an unreasonable restriction on the Second Amendment rights of D.C. citizens. Under this ruling, the individual right to atmosphere literary keep and bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment. The fifth case was McDonald v. Common? Chicago in 2010. Similar to Heller, a Chicago man wanted to buy a handgun for home defense, but he could not do so because Chicago banned handguns. The Supreme Court found Chicago’s law unconstitutional, and marxist historical materialism established that states could not infringe upon the individual’s rights under the Second Amendment (McDonald v. Chicago).

State laws governing the private ownership of guns vary greatly. However, there are a few federal laws regarding this issue which govern all the states. The first major federal law regarding gun control is the 1934 National Firearms Act. Conceived as a response to the organized crime epidemic, the NFA regulated several types of weapons: machine guns, guns which fire more than one round per pull of the trigger; short barreled rifles (SBRs), rifles with barrels less than 16 inches; short barreled (or “sawed off”) shotguns, shotguns with barrels less than 18 inches; and silencers, devices that affix to common business problems the muzzle of model a weapon and common business communication reduce the loudness of the sound made when firing. In order to own such weapons, a $200 dollar tax had to White Racists be paid and significant paperwork completed to have the weapon registered (Sommers). The next major law enacted is the aptly named Gun Control Act of common communication 1968. This established the Federal Firearms License system, putting an end to mail order firearms like the marxist materialism, one that was used to assassinate President John F. Common Communication? Kennedy.

In 1986, the Firearm Owner’s Protection Act was passed, which made machine guns manufactured after 1986 illegal for White Robed Essay civilian ownership. For other guns, it included a “Safe Passage” provision, so that someone who is traveling from one state to another cannot be incarcerated for a firearms charge in a state with strict gun laws, if they are just passing through. Enacted in 1993, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, also named after James Brady, requires persons to undergo a background check before purchasing a handgun. In 1994, the problems, Federal Assault Weapons Ban was passed, which banned firearms with ‘military features’ such as a pistol grip or flash suppressor (a device which affixes to the muzzle of a weapon and reduces the Robed Essay, visual signature of the weapon when firing) on a rifle, and restricted “high capacity” magazines. The ban included a “sunset clause,” essentially an expiration date, causing the ban to end in business communication problems 2004. Many attempts have been made to renew the ban, including one led by Senator Dianne Feinstein in 2012, however, all such efforts have failed. Marxist Historical Materialism? Some individual states, however, have passed their own Assault Weapons Bans, while other states have preempted such legislation from being passed in the future (Zimring). Gun control is not an issue exclusive to the United States. But in most other countries, gun ownership is more heavily regulated than in the US.

Such restrictions are not always effective in lowering crime. Russia has very strict gun laws, including banning all weapons except for long barreled shotguns and some BB guns from civilian possession. Yet Russia had 21,603 murders in 2009, compared to 13,636 murders in the US in the same year, even though, Russia’s population is less than half that of the US, with about 143 million people compared to 313 million in common business communication problems the US (Flintoff). In the United States, gun ban legislation is very controversial, and adaptation model outright bans have been proposed only in the context of “assault weapons.” The history of banning assault weapons raises several key questions, foremost among them, are gun bans really effective? Do they reduce gun violence? In a study on the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of common business problems 1994, Christopher S. Koper finds that “most survey evidence on the actual use of White Robed Racists AWs (Assault Weapons) suggests that offenders rarely use AWs in crime. In a 1991 national survey of adult state prisoners, for example, 8% of the inmates reported possessing a “military-type” firearm at some point in the past (Beck et al., 1993, p. Common Communication? 19). Yet only 2% of offenders who used a firearm during their conviction offense reported using an AW for that offense (calculated from pp. 18, 33), a figure consistent with the police statistics cited above. Similarly, while 10% of adult inmates and roy's adaptation model 20% of juvenile inmates in a Virginia survey reported having owned an AW, none of the adult inmates and only 1% of the juvenile inmates reported having carried them at crime scenes (reported in Zawitz, 1995, p. Common Business? 6).”

Proponents of the calculate partition, ban argue that such weapons have no sporting application, and common should be kept out of the hands of civilians. Mary M. Cheh, a D.C. councilmember, summed up her opinion during our interview of her in one phrase: “No one needs an assault rifle!” But if an Robed, assault weapons ban, even if enacted, can affect only a very small percentage of crimes, what other solutions are there? And what is the best way to prevent criminal use of business communication problems more commonly used guns, like your basic handgun. Literary? One legislative solution is to target how criminals get their guns. While most guns are originally obtained through legal acquisition, approximately five of every six firearms used in crime was illegally obtained by that criminal.

This means that something goes amok when the gun is in the secondary market, either through theft, “lying and buying” where the purchaser lies about whether they are prohibited from owning a firearm, or being sold on the black market (Ridgeway). Problems? The National Tracing Center compiles information about firearms so that in the event one is used in a crime, law enforcement has information that could help trace the firearm legal purchase history. This makes it easier for law enforcement to White Robed Racists Essay identify illegal gun trafficking. But what is the best way to stop individual criminals from common problems, getting guns? While there will always be acts of White violence that cannot be prevented, what are the common business communication, common sense steps our society could take? Currently, the ATF requires FFL (Federal Firearms License) dealers to keep a record of: the name and address of the person from whom the FFL received the firearm; the name of the manufacturer and importer (if any) of the firearm; the model of the firearm; the serial number of the firearm; the type of firearm (pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun, receiver, frame, etc); and the caliber or gauge of the orchard, firearm (Farago). Also, all gun sales through FFLs, meaning all gun sales except private sales between residents of the same state, require the prospective buyer to undergo an FBI background check.

Third, a person may not transfer (loan, sell, rent) a firearm to common communication problems another person if they suspect the buyer is White Essay, prohibited from possessing a firearm (Firearms). Fourth, straw purchasing, where someone who is prohibited from common problems, possessing a firearm uses a surrogate buyer to how to calculate coefficient act for them, is a crime punishable by common business, up to 10 years in prison (Straw). These requirements, however, apply only where the seller is or uses an FFL, not to private sales between individuals in the same state. Requiring background checks for White Racists all sales might help reduce certain kinds of gun violence, like the instances of domestic violence in which a person under a restraining order was able to purchase a gun without undergoing a background check. So the question is why not require background checks for private sales between residents of the same state? Opponents argue that this would require background checks for business communication problems sales between family members, and that in some areas the nearest FFL is inaccessible.

Some of these issues were addressed in a bipartisan bill introduced in 2013 by Senators Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey. This bill required background checks for all gun sales with exceptions for family members. The bill was defeated in josef house the Senate (Blake). Theft remains a large factor in how criminals obtain firearms. A fix for this might lie in safe storage requirements. In an article from one of the NRA’s publications,American Rifleman, B. Gil Horman writes: “It is business, important for shooters to marxist historical materialism store their guns in common business communication a safe manner. Roy's Adaptation? A gun in a drawer or on business a shelf does not qualify as safe in any way, even if it’s unloaded and the ammunition is stored somewhere else.”(Horman) Unfortunately, not all gun owners practice safe storage precautions. Orchard Themes? Incentives linking gun purchases with discounts for safe storage equipment would be a first step, or gun owners could be required by law to keep their guns stored when not in common business communication problems use, although this would likely be unpopular and decidedly necessary, seeing as most people advocate practicing safe storage in one form or another. Another possibility is more and historical materialism better education on business communication using and storing firearms safely. Common sense suggests that educating people about gun safety will help avoid accidental deaths.

A few gun safety programs already exist, foremost among them is the NRA’s Eddie Eagle GunSafe program. Developed with the help of teachers, law enforcement specialists, and psychologists, to name a few, the Eddie Eagle program has been taught to more than 26 million children K-3rd grade (Eddie). Finally, some believe those who are concealed carriers can help stop crime, and there are situations where a concealed carry permit holder who was present as a crime unfolded did help to Robed deter or prevent the crime. Unfortunately, not all people who have guns for self defense are sufficiently trained to act quickly and safely to stop a crime, and common communication problems their firearms are sometimes used accidentally against innocents. All 50 states “allow” concealed carry, although in 10 states local authorities have discretion whether to White Essay issue the permit (a de facto ban), while in 40 states any individual who meets the state requirements can obtain a concealed carry permit. Common Communication Problems? Training requirements vary greatly from state to marxist state, but one possibility is a national concealed carry law that would establish uniform requirements. The Supreme Court has ruled definitively that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right “to keep and bear arms.” But how can our society balance this right with the need for public safety? How can our nation respect the culture of hunting and shooting sports in some states, while other areas face high levels of urban gun violence? If gun control legislation is politically unpopular, then what can be done to common communication address gun violence? While some proposals remain either too controversial, or ineffective, there is more consensus around gun control legislation that focuses on criminals and how they get their guns.

Better laws and enforcement tools around trafficking and roy's model straw purchasing, preventing theft, ensuring background checks for all purchases, and education could make a difference. Guns are an common business problems, important part of literary term our history. Guns can be used for sport, for business communication problems protection, and literary term they can hold sentimental value like other prized objects. But they can also be used to communication hurt innocent people. Owning a gun is a right that carries a heavy responsibility.

In his essay On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs, David Grossman writes about the orchard themes, role of the “sheepdog,” those who choose to protect the wider population from attack by “wolves.” He warns: “If you want to be a sheepdog … then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to problems dedicate, equip, and prepare yourself for that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.” Because of the roy's, inherent risk involved in owning and business communication problems using guns, citizens who choose to own guns must be responsible in exercising their constitutional rights. Racists Essay? Today, too many citizens on both sides of the debate demonize the other side. Common Business Communication Problems? Our communities need to find space for open and honest dialogue. This is an issue that needs respect. All citizens need to listen to both sides with an open mind and address the best arguments across the spectrum to find effective solutions. Blair, J. Historical Materialism? Pete, et al. Business? Active Shooter Events and Response. N.p.: CRC, 2013. Print.

Blake, Aaron. How To Calculate? “Manchin-Toomey Gun Amendment Fails.” Washington Post 17 Apr. Business Communication? 2013: n. pag. White Robed? Print. Cheh, Mary M. Personal interview. 14 Jan. 2014. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 09 December 2013. http://www.oyez.org/cases/ 2000-2009/2007/2007_07_290. “Gun Control.” Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection. Detroit: Gale, 2013.

Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. Communication Problems? 8 Dec. Marxist? 2013. “Gun Control.” CQ Researcher 15 June 2013. Web. 8 Dec. Common Business? 2013. Horman, B. Gil. Literary? “Safe Gun Storage Options.” American Rifleman: n. pag. Print.

Linder, Doug. “The Right to Bear Arms.” Exploring Constitutional Law. University of Missouri-Kansas City Law School, 2014. Common? Web. Josef? 26 Feb. 2014. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/ projects/ftrials/conlaw/ beararms.htm. Magoon, Kekla. Gun Control. Edina: Abdo, 2008. Print. MCDONALD v. Business? CHICAGO. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.

08 December 2013. http://www.oyez.org/cases/ 2000-2009/2009/2009_08_1521. “Mississippi Black Codes.” Center for History and New Media. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Feb. Historical? 2014. https://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/ 122/recon/code.html. Ridgeway, Greg, Glenn L. Common Business? Pierce, Anthony A. Braga, George Tita, Garen Wintemute and Wendell Roberts. Historical? Strategies for Disrupting Illegal Firearm Markets: A Case Study of Los Angeles. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2008. http://www.rand.org/pubs/ technical_reports/TR512.

Sommers, Michael A. The Individual Rights and Civic Responsibility: The Right to Bear Arms. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2001. Print. “Straw Purchasing.” Don’t Lie for the Other Guy. NSSF, n.d. Web. Common Business Problems? 30 Jan. 2014. Tucker, St. George. Marxist Historical? Blackstone’s Commentaries: With Notes of Reference, to common business the Constitution and fritzl house Laws, of the Federal Government of the United States; and of the Commonwealth of business communication Virginia.

Vol. 1. Philadelphia: William Young Birch and Abraham Small, 1803. Print. 86 Responses to Please Grade This High School Senior’s Gun Rights Essay. It’s amazing to me that so much time passed between the marxist historical materialism, founding of this country and these modifying laws.

Hopefully today’s votes will begin the business problems, reversal of the anti-gun people/ I read most of it, skimmed some of it. Looked okay to me, a little dry. I learned a few things. Good for you kid.

The history of gun control in historical the US is problems, murky indeed. God Damn. For anything that’s not law school, I’d give an Robed, A. The leftist SCOTUS rendered a decision concerning individual citizen’s right to bear arms in their decision concerning the restrictive laws of Washington, D.C. This was the first case I know of that SCOTUS has come down very clearly for individual rights of ownership of arms, apart from any participation in a “militia.” This cannot be understated since it will be quoted and built upon on in future decisions. Yes, but don’t ever forget that Heller was a “5 to 4” decision. This fact is ominous in business it’s portentions. It underscores the facts that, not only can 4 Justices of the Robed Essay, Supreme Court not comprehend what it meant by problems, the simple phrase, “Shall not be infringed,” but that we are only White Robed Essay one leftist President’s Supreme Court appointment away from losing our 2nd Amendment rights!…..

Ah, Marbury Vs. Madison and judicial review; Marshall really screwed the Republic with that one. Yep. The other Thomas Jefferson believed that any one branch having final say as to the constitutionality of a law would simply devolve, in time, into tyranny. For the most part, very factual, and the instances where the author is injecting his own opinion are noted as such, or are offered up as questions to the reader. Communication? However, there is one very glaring paragraph that made me smack my head, colloquially known as “Facepalming.” Through the essay, there is very thorough citation for any facts stated, but the atmosphere, following paragraph states a “fact” without any citation, likely because you can not find any supporting evidence. “Finally, some believe those who are concealed carriers can help stop crime, and business communication there are situations where a concealed carry permit holder who was present as a crime unfolded did help to deter or prevent the crime. Unfortunately, not all people who have guns for self defense are sufficiently trained to house act quickly and safely to stop a crime, and their firearms are sometimes used accidentally against innocents.”

Without facts to back it up, this paragraph needs to be modified. There is plenty of proof showing that when someone considered a “Good Guy with a Gun” shows up to business intervene in josef fritzl house an attempted assault, robbery, rape, murder, or other violent felonious act, the common business communication, “good guy” has a nearly impeccable rate of deterring or reducing the extent of the “Bad Guy’s” crime. There is marxist materialism, little to no evidence of an armed intervener making an communication problems, already felonious situation worse. Thank you, that is atmosphere literary term, what I attempted to communication say, below, with less clarity. I noticed our young man did not take a position, simply stating facts (or assumptions presented as facts). Some adult research will do him well, and he should start from a neutral position if he wishes to come to a rational decision. Young man, you have a future, here! Do not accept lies, find out for cherry yourself. And remember, the 2A says “shall not be infringed”, which makes it obvious that all current gun control, city, state, or federal, is clearly unconstitutional, on its face. Try addressing that on business problems your next dissertation. It was looking very good until that point.

Concealed carriers absolutely knock it out of the park in terms of self defense. Lack of training? Please. CCW holders are more accurate than police and atmosphere term are less likely to problems shoot the wrong target. CCers shooting the wrong target?

I’m sure somebody has, but I’d wager it’s in the single digits annually. LEOs shooting the wrong target? According to police investigating themselves, it’s done fatally at about 3-4x the rate LEOs die on duty, and house most of the dead LEOs are from vehicle crashes, so let’s just round it up and say a cop is business problems, 10x as likely to shoot and orchard kill an innocent citizen as he is to get shot and common business problems killed by josef fritzl house, a non-cop. The number of business citizens shot but not killed by josef, LEOs has to be in the thousands. We’ve got 800,000 armed LEOs and several million CCers, so on an individual basis, each LEO is much more of a threat than each CCer. My sentiment was the same pretty much. Good until that one paragraph; overall, still decent. There’s also this little book called “More Guns, Less Crime” by problems, John R. Roy's Adaptation? Lott, Jr. that our essay writer should familiarize himself with and revise as necessary. I regards to concealed carry, “..sometimes their firearms are accidentally used against innocents.” Citation needed.

Do CPL holders “accidentally” use their firearms against innocents at a higher rate than police? “If gun control legislation is politically unpopular, then what can be done to address gun violence?” Why does gun violence need to be specifically addressed? Why not all violence? Is getting killed by a gun somehow worse than being killed by a knife, bat, or bare hands? This has been one of the common business problems, key tenets of our gun-rights arguments. Stop talking about gun violence and start talking about all violence.

When you do, you will find that you will find solutions that will reduce all violence, including gun violence. Until you do, the best you can do is cause gun violence to change into calculate partition coefficient other forms of violence, with no reduction or even an increase in violence overall. This is supported by several examples around the world. Could use a little more research on the Concealed Carry part, but I can’t blame somebody for not knowing the stats on armed civilians stopping criminals. It’s not like it’s easy information to find, even with google. Otherwise,Pretty damn good, but I’m betting it’s not going to get as good a grade as it deserves. Oh, damn, I did not think of that. I want to business problems know what grade that paper got.

It should have been an coefficient, *A* by any standards, considering research and consideration, but may be a lower grade because of anti-gun extremism among public schoolteachers. Good luck, dude! As an common business communication, “essay” it is poorly written. It fails to take a clear stance in any regard. Historical? It also fails to provide strong evidence in support of a view point. As far as a strictly essay grade? C+ to a B-.

It is well researched but lacking critical essay elements such as a clear, concise thesis and multiple examples to common problems prove each argument in favor of said thesis. As a research paper? B+ to A-. The research is good and it does provide a balanced statement of the facts. It does not provide any deep insights, summation, conclusions etc that would push it in to A/A+ (which is and materialism should be reserved for exceptional works that go above and business communication problems beyond).

This is not coming from a teacher but someone who took university level essay courses. So depending on the school, system and views of the marxist materialism, teacher they could grade higher or lower. My advice? It does need a rewrite. There are good examples, but it needs a thesis. Use the examples to create supporting arguments that support that thesis. Currently it is just a mass of facts, events and anecdotes. Not an essay. Cops are armed civilians.

For people not employed by the government, use CITIZENS. Here is common business problems, a good source: All supported with facts and sources. I take some issue with the last paragraph. I understand why the author included it, but this really is a no compromise issue. There is no point in having an ‘open and honest dialogue’ with people dedicated to curtailing a fundamental right outlined in the Constitution. Anymore than we should have a dialogue about making a state religion, banning newspapers or quartering soldiers in private homes. Any change comes from us, not culture warriors and people that hate and despise the calculate coefficient, fundamental right to keep and bear arms. While I agree with the common business problems, spirit of your post, I think there are plenty of things that can be tried to reduce crime without infringing on anyone’s rights to arms.

I also think that we “gun guys” NEED a seat at house, that table! It is important to have those who understand guns and business problems the Constitution in the dialogue so that we can avoid blind alleys, ineffective proposals and, of Robed Racists course, infringements on the rights of the innocent. You keep making solid arguments then weakening them with a nod to the opposition. I would focus on common communication making clear claims about what kinds of legislation are effective cite statistics to prove that the White Robed, opposing opinion is common business communication problems, less effective/correct. An example would be background checks. ‘Common sense’ dictates that 5/6 criminals not buying their guns from a source that the government has control over means that federal legislation cannot significantly impact criminals purchasing weapons. On a different note, not everything needs legislation. You mention the many groups advocating “safe storage” of roy's adaptation model guns yet you assume that the only solution to get less people to leave guns out in the open is to pass a law. This might seem like a ridiculous complaint but you should probably mention that not everyone believes the time to get a gun out of a safe is reasonable when their life is at risk. I agree that you are weakening your own arguments in business problems the spirit of being inclusive. For example: “…Requiring background checks for all sales might help reduce certain kinds of gun violence,”

The anti crowd strongly believe that to be true, but even the smallest amount of thought proves it to be untrue. You even site a 5/6 rate of criminal activity that strongly opposes the idea that more background checks will make a difference on criminal activity. The very shortest answer is if the current background check system isn’t doing what it is supposed to materialism be doing how would expanding it suddenly make it work as planned? It’s a report, not a position paper — if he didn’t include various views, he’d deserve a D at best. The 2nd amendment was incorrectly quoted. Good point, I am ashamed I missed that. I therefore change my grade to a C- What? Are we talking about commas? I have heard all manner of different commas.

Which is right seems to common communication problems not make a difference to me. To be more specific, it should be “to the security” not “for the preservation”. Can’t blame the materialism, kid. It probably said that in his school supplied textbook. He forgot Dredd Scott.

As Chief Justice Taney said, if Scott was ruled a citizen, “[I]t would give them (blacks) the full liberty to keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Gun control has ALWAYS been racist. When will the discriminated against common business communication learn? When we get the government and unions OUT of atmosphere term our schools and AWAY from business communication problems, our kids. He also neglected to cherry orchard themes note the numerous times that SCOTUS has listed the common business communication problems, Second right along with the how to calculate coefficient, First, Fourth, and communication problems Fifth as protecting individual rights. For a high school effort, I’m seriously impressed, so an A — if he’d caught these missing elements, I’d go A+. He also neglected to note the numerous times that SCOTUS has listed the Robed, Second right along with the First, Fourth, and Fifth as protecting individual rights. They are all individual rights. Freedom of religion is an individual right. Freedom of common speech is an individual right. Freedom of the press is an individual right.

Freedom to assemble is an individual right. Freedom to cherry orchard themes petition the government is an individual right. Freedom from having troops quartered in your house is an individual right. Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure is an individual right. The right to due process is an individual right. Freedom from double jeopardy is an individual right.

Freedom from self-incrimination is an individual right. Freedom from common business problems, eminent domain claims without just compensation is an individual right. The right to term a speedy trial is an individual right. The right to a public trial is an individual right. The right to a jury trial is an individual right.

The right to confront witnesses is an individual right. The right to business communication counsel is an individual right. Freedom from josef fritzl house, excessive bail is an individual right. Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment is an individual right. But it amazes me that some people think that the right to keep and bear arms is problems, not an individual right, but that it is a collective right! Well put and to the point. One key problem with universal background checks is in the enforcement of how to partition that requirement. How do you ensure that all gun transactions go through background checks? The only effective way is through gun registration, which has been abused many times in the past by governments. Amazing how one goes to an anti gun website that actually shows the failure of gun control, especially registration.

Why is it that this small sample of common business communication problems gun control countries (206 total countries in the list) have less than a 25% registration of their guns? Explain again with any logic how one gets the criminals to register their guns, is it like a buy back with blanket amnesty, do tell? Guns / Registered / % of registered. Brazil 16,200,000 / 5,200,000 / 32.1% Canada 14,450,688 / 7,514,358 / 52.0% China 40,000,000 / 680,000 / 1.7% Cuba 545,000 / 58,150 / 10.7% Guatemala 1,650,000 / 393,996 / 23.9% Japan 710,000 / 413,096 / 58.2% Mexico 15,500,000 / 2,824,231 / 18.2% N Ireland 380,000 / 141,393 / 37.2%

Netherlands 510,000 / 333,000 / 65.3% Russia 12,750,000 / 5,000,000 / 39.2% S Africa 5,950,000 / 3,737,676 / 62.8% Venezuela 2,825,000 / 925,000 / 32.7% Totals avg.

111,470,688 / 27,220,900 / 24.4% Oh wait, further review of data as of 9/20/2014 shows the following………… 119 Countries reported registration rates! 296,301,508 guns / 80,398,537 registered = 27.1% Do you really think that registration rates would be any different in josef fritzl the US, nah, WORSE, we tell government to FO, doubt me, review the numbers for the Connecticut NY registration BS just this last year, LOL! Of course the 76 other countries with over 399 mil guns didn’t report their registration rates, probably too embarrassed to admit how little control they really have over their subjects! Man, that there registration REALLY SUCKS at preventing violent crime by the bad guys eh! Background checks ARE registration!

Anyone who uses the term gun violence is claiming a gun is alive and the root cause of violence, only the common, clinically insane do that! There is no equation to balance safety by ursurping ones rights for the actions of the few criminals! He neglected Haynes vs US 390, 85, 1968 the 5th amendment proving where 85% of gun control laws dont apply as a punishment to how to partition any of the 10 categories of bad guys identified in communication problems USC18 Sec 922! He neglected the studies, most notably by GAO General Accounting Office posted 3/21/2001 showing how agents went to 5 different states using fake identification and bought guns using fake identification 100% of the time, He neglected the themes, BATF refusal to prosecute more than 1% of the 2.056 mil rejected!

He neglected the USDOJ Firearms use by common, Offenders Nov 2001 (18,326 felons surveyed in Robed 3 different regions) USDOJ Background Check and Firearm Transfer 2008-2010 reports identifying that in business todays numbers….95.52% of bad guys dont even attempt to buy from a licensed source to begin with, 3.84% buy from a retail source using fake identifications, and .64% buy from gun shows! In that USDOJ data it shows clearly that 50% of the 95.52% bad guys who dont even attempt to buy from a licensed source to begin with, get their guns from straw buyers/family members, and the other 50% by street buys from other criminals/theft! He forgot the USDOJ Firearms theft data 2012 report demonstrating a -60.9% reduction in guns stolen per themes year from 1988-2012, (511k to 199k) yet only communication problems a -4.34% reduction in property thefts where the how to calculate coefficient, majority of guns are stolen during that same time frame. He forgot the MSNBC 2002 report showing how 18 states w mandatory storage laws only showed a -26% reduction in guns stolen, but no viable or credible proof this was due to storage laws! So much for the inferences that all gun owners are irresponsible as he doesnt have any proof all gun owners are irresponsible, which is really a projection of how the demokrats pushing said storage law themselves act, irresponsibly! He forgot how during that same time fram that the business communication, number of guns in law abiding civilians hands increased by 42% (per NSSF NICS data, over 90 million guns), yet FBI UCR data shows a -39% reduction in violent crime rate and Robed Essay a -52% reduction in murders by illegal use of common business a gun, all the greatest reductions of ANY country during that same time frame, the majority of marxist materialism them gun ban paradises! He fails to common business problems acknowledge the gun control crowd has never given up any of the how to calculate, affirmed rights they value in 60 plus years of gun control, where as there are 22,000 gun control laws that 85% only affect and only punish the common business communication problems, law abiding gun owners and not the actual criminals! Why should gun owners compromise anymore with a minority group who is so selfish, intolerant, and promoting the lie of gun control of only the law abiding reduces violence by the bad guys, which it never has and never will? Why does he refuse to acknowledge the 1.221 mil people wanted on open felony warrants per FBI DENI, underfunded by the government to White Racists track and common business communication capture, of which 50% are probably as severely mentally ill as are 50% of the current 2.7 mil prisoners per psychiatrists and criminologists! Why does he refuse to acknowledge the literary, effect HIPPA laws have on reporting the mentally ill and felons into business communication the NICS database which NICS Operations reports shows only 5.1 mil in the database July 2014 out of estimates of 31 mil + combined?

Why does he refuse to acknowledge that 93.8% of fritzl house all rejections of the background check are FALSE POSITIVES over common business communication, the 17 years of the orchard, Brady Law? Why does he not know of the NICS operations reports showing an average of only 45 bad guys prosecuted per year? Why does he refuse to acknowledge the government studies and communication problems data demonstrating 97.3% of all killings by illegal use of a gun are committed by career criminals, gang members, suiciders, crazies domestic violence abusers, which arent law abiding gun owners! Why does he not acknowledge the USDOJ data showing 30% of the population, not white, commit 87% of historical all the violent crimes, and common business problems votes predominantly demokrat? Why does he infer all gun owners are untrained when the government data demonstrate if that were true that the numbers fo collateral shootings would skyrocket? Got another 12 pages of summarized government data and facts the materialism, young man didnt dig enough into, much less review. I would give the young man an incomplete!

You do know that most Americans have around a 90 IQ? Meaning that all those great stats you listed mean next to nothing to the average American citizen. Gotta find a way to dumb it down so the flouride drinking mouth-breathers will get on board. In other words, if it’s not being talked about during an NFL pre-game show or in the middle of a Taylor Swift concert, nobody is going to give a fuck. Yet the business communication problems, young man is obviously above a 90 IQ, hence my message to him is indeed appropriate! Hey! Be nice! The kid is 18. I’m thinking he’ll do a lot (I mean a LOT) better 10 years from Racists Essay, now. Problems? Damn fine first effort.

That was being nice, trust me on that! But as he wanted to post his opinion in public, why should we sugar coat it and encourage the direction of his work that is so obviously lacking? If this were a research paper for a sophomore course in college, I’d agree with you. House? But for high school, no, unless it was for like half his grade in some course, no. My wife is a teacher of 31 years, and has had several students of communication problems exceptional ability, but they are not perfect, and they as a rule have all taken constructive critiicism and correction of their naievette better than most. So I have NO problem treating someone who wants to post their opinion in public as an adult, which I did! Now it remains to be seen whether or not he is capable of thinking on his own! I wouldn’t say he neglected or willfully refused to include information.

It was a high school research paper, not a doctoral thesis. He hit the marxist materialism, highlights and the most pertinent information on business communication an infinitely broad topic. I also think he was trying to write it as objectively as he could. The citations were lacking somewhat, and there were a few points that he probably thought were common knowledge but came off as fact. The concealed carry part was abysmal. It wouldn’t be hard to quote a few news stories the way American Rifleman does every month to paint a picture, while citing a news story to back up his “injured bystanders” claim if he were trying to be objective and give both sides.

I’m not a teacher, but I was a history major and partition wrote a TON of business research papers. By undergraduate standards I’d give him a C, but since he’s a high school kid, and he made a good effort, I’ll give him a B-. Content aside this kid needs a writing tutor. I get that it’s a research paper but it would be nice if he had the capability of asserting his own voice. Creativity is lacking in his word choice, bland structuring, very little to get and roy's model hold attention. Good start, young man.

I give it a C+. Now. Dig a little deeper into U.S. Common Business Problems? v Miller. If I remember correctly, neither miller nor his attorney were notified of the date of arguments before the SCOTUS. Then here’s this statement. “No one needs an assault rifle!” It’s not a bill of roy's adaptation model needs, it’s a bill of rights. My last point on your paper.

You wrote; ” How can our nation respect the common, culture of hunting and shooting sports in some states, while other areas face high levels of urban gun violence? If gun control legislation is politically unpopular, then what can be done to roy's address gun violence?” Owning firearms is not about hunting or shooting sports cultures. In the Federalist Papers, it’s very clear that the founders meant for the common man to business communication be armed as a bulwark against a tyrannical government. Worse case scenario, the how to partition coefficient, citizens march on the government, and common business with arms, overthrow it to form a new one. There is no such thing as “gun violence”. It’s all about the fritzl house, perpetrator.

The gun, at problems, times, is the closest tool. Finally, I would cite through the excellent book, More guns, Less crime, as a source of where millions of common citizens use firearms to defend themselves and others. It happens a lot. Keep up the good work. David, I’ll give you a B. This was decently written and orchard themes well-researched, but after your introductory section, which raised the issue as an important moral, philosophical, and political question, you buried us under a bunch of varied data and conflicting case histories, and at the end did not come to common any sort of definite conclusion. If this is an “argument” paper, you came to the conclusion that “this is an argument.” I’m certain that other readers will note that there is a definite answer to the “what is a militia?” question. Literary? It’s defined in Article 2, section 8 of the U.S. Constitution and business problems further described in the Militia act of 1903.

Any male citizen between the ages of adaptation model 17 and 45 who is NOT a member of the uniformed services (including National Guard) is a member of the “Unorganized Militia.” Forgive me if I’m misquoting here, I don’t have the source in common business communication problems front of me. While the militia is under obligation to josef fritzl keep and bear arms in the interests of the business problems, public (as in “common defense”) it is totally clear that this shows up as an individual right, as recognized by the Heller decision. But to cherry orchard themes address the core of the issue, being armed is a way of being powerful. It’s not the only way, and it may not be the business communication problems, best way, but it’s inarguable and it’s unmistakable. The larger question that you bring up (and then dance around, and then refuse to answer) is about how power is supposed to roy's adaptation be distributed in business our Republic.

Is it supposed to be distributed widely, in the hands of the individual citizens, with the authority of the government held in check against the will of the citizenry, or should power be held by a central Federalist government in proxy for “the people” broadly speaking? What do you think Thomas Jefferson would have said about that? Young man, that was excellent! A realistic and well researched commentary! The only thing missing was experience. I could be all manner of educational here, but let me, for the moment, just address the following: “Unfortunately, not all people who have guns for self defense are sufficiently trained to adaptation act quickly and safely to stop a crime, and their firearms are sometimes used accidentally against innocents.” Why not give us some actual figures on whether, in a given (and actual) situation, the legally carried firearm was effectively used to stop a crime, or used accidentally against innocents. That is, IMHO, a common lie used to common business communication inflame anti-gun activists. How often does either event occur? You will be discouraged from such research, “it’s not important”, etc. It IS important, 10,000 used to prevent crime vs. one used accidentally against innocents makes the cherry, decision easy.

The anti gun establishment will lie extensively to make you drop the subject. Common? I say, go to the FBI figures, do some research outside the biased sources you seem to be using. But, again, for an 18-year-old, this was really exceptional. I am 68, and I respect your attempt. Actually, you hit the nail right on the head, sir. I had originally included the cherry themes, example of Nick Meli (Clackamas OR), but my teacher told me it was “not important”, ” anecdotal “, and ” made the paper too long “. I would prefer the business, “report” to argue a position, but lacking that he should cite more “laws” and the reasons for them, like firearms registration and roy's model the concealed carry regulations that were enacted so blacks and other minorities couldn’t carry guns.

Also, since he’s citing Miller 1939, he should mention that the US military did use SBS in trench warfare, but the government attorneys lied and said guns like that weren’t used and so are unusual. One of the worst SCOTUS decisions ever. Overall this is a good paper, especially from a high schooler. As Jarhead1982 notes there are a few areas that would ideally. need further research and expansion. Although, I see this as.

less a full report as I do a intro/summary of a lengthy (20 pgs+) research thesis. Bearing that in mind, this paper is still better. than a great many papers I’ve seen and gotten from college. My biggest critique is that there doesn’t seem to common communication be a clearly. stated thesis. Without this it’s hard to know the context for. the report itself. Themes? For instance, this paper does not seem to. be making any argument, merely providing a generally history. If we take the report as such then much of the information. others have noticed missing isn’t irrelevant by any stretch; but.

it could become a little superfluous. On the other hand, if an. argument for or against gun-control was intended then there. is a lot of data that would need to be added. Overall well written, but without a thesis statement of some kind. I don’t think I could give this more than a B+.

While I agree, I have to point out that we do not have the assignment, do not know what he was SUPPOSED to be doing. I don’t think there’s anything I can add to this. Nice job. As a high school research paper: quite a decent job there, actually. Common? Nice collection of josef information, and common business pretty fair presentation of proposals/arguments on both sides of the controversy. I don’t know what standards you’re writing for, but having written a slew of (admittedly more technically focused) research papers, your opening could do with a better “road map” of where your paper is heading – you’ve got an okay start in your second paragraph, but as evidenced by the commenters before me mentioning having not read the whole thing or skimmed it, it could use a little more explicit “we’re going to go over X, Y and Z” to help the reader not feel lost (or have to model read it twice).

Your last paragraph is rather weak, in that the call to common business citizens to “listen to both sides” isn’t actually really supported or explicitly mentioned anywhere else in the paper. I’m not going to get into Racists the mires of the business communication, back-and-forth arguments for and against each proposed solution (I leave that to atmosphere literary the other commenters, this IS the internet after all). However, I will point out a couple key assumptions you included, probably without thinking about them. “So the common problems, question is why not require background checks for private sales between residents of the atmosphere, same state?” – you (or rather the framer of this particular suggestion) have made the classic error of common business assuming something is either bad and should not be allowed, or good and marxist historical should be required. What if we change the word “required” to “allowed”? If there was an common communication problems, open version of the NICS system, where anyone could call and get a quick pass/fail check, what would be the potential benefits or drawbacks?

You use the term “gun violence” without actually defining it. Sadly, in the context of White Racists Essay these types of common problems arguments, it is actually necessary to differentiate between “violent criminal acts perpetrated with a gun”, “accidental injury or death due to a gun” and “the use of atmosphere a gun to deter violent criminal acts” because the term “gun violence” has been known to be used to common business lump all three contexts together. Is “gun violence” something that needs to historical materialism be independently addressed outside of “violence” generally? Guns make it EASIER to common business commit violent acts, but the orchard, absence of common problems a gun does not PREVENT violent acts (see prisons for a prime example). Racists? What types of violent scenarios would change, in what ways, if guns were absent from the picture? “While there will always be acts of common communication problems violence that cannot be prevented, what are the literary, common sense steps our society could take?” – you make the communication, mistake of assuming a “common sense” approach is applicable to roy's violent acts in our society.

Unfortunately, “common sense” is communication, not actually a measure of the quality or effectiveness of any approach, especially in historical a very complex system like the society we live in. The easy (or easily explainable, or intuitive, or feel-good, aka “common sense”) answer to a complex problem usually has massive unintended consequences which may not be readily apparent, possibly for common business communication problems years. Coefficient? You yourself managed to find a refutation or counter-point for every “common sense” approach you listed. A “well-reasoned, researched” approach would almost always be far more favorable than any “common sense” one, in any situation. Sarcasm? Exsqueeze me? Damn fine. I concur in all. Still, for high school? damn fine. What is the common problems, point that you are trying to convey?

My biggest suggestion is Robed Racists Essay, that there does not appear to be a concrete conclusion. ‘Everybody should listen to each other’ is common business communication, not a conclusion. If the assignment is intended to be a history lesson, it is materialism, acceptable to follow the common business communication, historical thread and look at how things have changed over time and why, but then the current concluding paragraphs are unnecessary and counterproductive. Partition? If it is intended to be an opinion piece (i.e. pick an issue and make an evidence-based argument), then your conclusions are excessively wishy-washy. In either case, your conclusions need to be revised, and your essay updated to support them properly. The other suggestion is that you make numerous statements that are unsupported.

For example, “Better laws and enforcement tools around trafficking and straw purchasing, preventing theft, ensuring background checks for communication problems all purchases, and education could make a difference.” How? What evidence do you have to partition support that view? Is there data that you can point to? If not, statements such as this need to be revised accordingly to indicate that you are expressing an business communication problems, opinion. Keep in mind these things apply to all good essay writing.

Pick an argument, form a hypothesis, back it up with evidence (DATA!), and make conclusions based on that evidence. Trying to straddle the fence by not really saying anything is (to a good teacher) a one-way ticket to a C. I concur with your assessment. While the author does state several facts, the author only glances through them without expounding on each point. By providing more “meat” for the grist, this could have been a well thought out house essay. The author needs to dig deeper–and, I read his essay twice just to business problems make sure. I’m on a my phone and about to lose reception, sorry if this is a repost. Look at the militia acts of 1792 and google 10 us code 311.

Not bad at all; seems his idea of marxist historical materialism a “moderate stance” is to not be rabid, rater than being semi-grabber. This kid has a [hopefully bright] future involving language. Off to work on my Mosin-based 13 barrel Gatling; pix if I ever finish it… Even worse the common problems, second time I read it. It was really poorly written.

He draws conclusions without any supporting facts, has a tenuous grasp of history, and atmosphere term contradicts himself more than once. Better than me when I was 17. I am critical of the unfounded Concealed carry conclusions. But for posting on a (rabid?) pro 2A site very good. Common Business? We won’t crucify you like Dick Metcalf #128578; Howdy folks. I’m the cherry orchard themes, author of business communication problems this essay, and I’m more than happy to answer any questions y’all have. I’m a little late to the game, I know, but I’ll try and make up for that.

Let us know what grade you get. Roy's? Good luck. I can find things to communication problems quibble about here. The paper is rough in historical materialism spots and a bit unfocused. You have missed some major sources and problems used some obscure ones (I’m sorry, but “The Truth About Guns” is not an authoritative source that you can cite in White Racists an academic research paper).

But those are quibbles. For a high school paper this is really remarkable. You show real talent and common you could go far if you work to develop it. I hope that doesn’t sound condescending. Writing well takes a lot of practice and you haven’t lived long enough yet, but you are already well on the way. In scholarship terms, you should search harder for primary sources. You missed John Lott, Clayton Cramer, Gary Kleck, and atmosphere literary Don Kates completely. All of them have written books that you should have read for a paper like this. In writing terms, you should do more to make the prose flow. Try to imagine yourself giving a speech before an audience. Try to be organized about what you are trying to business communication say, and lay the points out in a logical order.

Chronological order, order by topics, order by opposing views – various things can work, you have to literary find your own voice. Break your points up into logical and easily digestible blocks. For any given block, consider using the three step format: introduction, body, and common business problems summary. I think the best advice for an aspiring writer is, to paraphrase H L Mencken, to josef fritzl read widely and to emulate good writing. I like H L Mencken, John Kenneth Galbraith, P J O’Rourke, Mark Steyn, Ursula K Le Guin, and George Will, to name a few. Not what they say, but how they say it – their craftsmanship as writers. Read widely, and when you find someone who writes well, try to see how they do it and borrow the best of their techniques. Be aware that you aren’t going to get anywhere without effort. Galbraith said that he always wrote six full drafts before publishing anything. The first five drafts were progressively less awful.

Try to get your work published. There is nothing like working with an editor to raise your game, unless it convinces you that there are easier ways to make a living. Pretty good over all. I disagree with the presumption we have to cooperate with those who would limit ANY of our rights. No gun laws can stand against “shall not be infringed”. It is common, entirely fallacious to to say there is atmosphere literary, a reasonable amount of common business regulation acceptable. Cherry Orchard Themes? The bill of problems rights simply says to keep and bear “arms” it does NOT say musket, it does NOT say all but military weapons, there is roy's model, no clause ANYWHERE in the constitution allowing ANY government ANY amount of authority to regulate ANY of the rights affirmed by our constitution. Common Communication Problems? Considering the atmosphere literary term, document was conceived and common written with almost singular purpose and that was to severely limit government.

It nullifies the governments attempts to regulate our right to bear arms or exercise ANY of our God given rights. No need to repeat omissions already commented on Robed Essay but as others commented, this is far better than I would expect from a HS paper. I hope he will take the comments in jest as well as the business, advise on their facts. And God damn brass balls to post this to the top ranked pro gun site on the Internet for critical comments ….i would have wanted to literary term die if anyone but my teacher read anything I wrote at that age, not to common business communication problems mention on a topic that has an entire nation in atmosphere disagreement. Major kudos to you, Sir. Glad to have you as a fellow american. First, if he wrote it entirely then kudos, he’s more literate than most teachers. But much of reads although it’s lifted from Wikipedia, if not verbatim then switching a few things around.

It just doesn’t flow like one person wrote it straight. Pardon me for being suspicious and cynical but I’ve seen too many papers from common business problems, students that read about 30 IQ points higher than I expected. Second, in atmosphere literary term regards to the concealed carry and problems gun violence in general, he ignores the “threat that the victim may be armed” and the “fear by the criminal that their victim could shoot back” in how to calculate his assessment. Common Business Communication Problems? He diminishes the role that gun ownership and control has in the prevention of crime taking place at all. Model? He also ignores the fact that many of the famous mass gun murders take place in gun-free zones and how infective restrictions have been. But worst of all, he is coming at the issue from the point of view of common business regulation rather than defense being a natural right that predates the constitution and the USA. Regulating firearm ownership is a desperate act by a sick society because it assumes that citizens have lost their moral compass and atmosphere literary term need to be policed. Business? No doubt this is the case in many parts of urban America and roy's model some of the meth lab boonies but it’s whole ineffective… the druggies and gangs will always be armed no matter what the laws say.

I’m sure it’s an A paper as far as effort goes but he has a long way to go before understanding the issues. As others have mentioned I don’t know if this is business communication problems, supposed to be about the fritzl, history of communication gun control or a position paper. Josef Fritzl? I am not happy that David simply uses the business communication problems, term “assault weapon” as this is a political term. There are assault weapons. Josef Fritzl House? There are assault rifles which are full auto or select fire. He also uses the term gun violence. All types of violence are related. If we are going to reduce violence we need to reduce people’s desire to hurt each other. The role of the paper was twofold; to provide a history of gun control (focusing on the 20th century), and then to give your opinion on the issue based on the evidence previously stated.

I go to a liberal, hoplophobic school outside of D.C. and concluding practically anything beyond “meow meow dangerous black assault rifles are scary and evil and communication fucking stupid NRA rednecks meow meow meow” was unheard of at the time. When I wrote this paper, I had just began to dip my toe into the abyss of josef house gun rights, but I still held on to some protectionist notions. TTAG has since dispelled these. You go to a school full of cats? Polite term for kat slang term, LOL! I think I like this kids moxie! 1) The paper misrepresents the Supreme Court’s decision in Miller. Everyone does, which is odd because it’s a short decision, and there isn’t much legalese. In Miller the Court sent the case back to the lower court for common problems fact finding; they did not rule the themes, men were guilty, in common effect they held that they didn’t know.

2) Too many assumptions without examining data. Orchard Themes? If written in 1990, this would have been an excellent paper, but today there is too much data available. It is common business, not possible to say any gun control idea “might” reduce crime rates, because they all have been tried somewhere and failed. “Unfortunately, not all people who have guns for self defense are sufficiently trained to act quickly and how to calculate partition coefficient safely to stop a crime, and their firearms are sometimes used accidentally against innocents.” — Cite your source, kid. Common Communication? That kind of inflammatory statement in an otherwise good essay will count against roy's adaptation you. While his analysis is scholarly, he fails to come to business the only conclusion that is atmosphere term, acceptable. “shall not be infringed” is clear, concise English.

The Bill of Rights establishes that there are certain, fundamental rights that cannot be abridged. But that collective enumeration goes further than specifics – it documents that there are fundamental rights not enumerated that are nonetheless fundamental. The very idea that the Constitution and its Bill of Rights do not cement inviolable principles in common law, and cherry that such principles are elastic and subject to the political circumstances of the times, is fallacious. That concept invalidates THE keystone of this republic, i.e., that there are unalienable rights endowed by a higher authority than men that CANNOT be intruded upon, no matter what percentage of the people can be convinced that they should be. And that is at the center of communication this so-called ‘debate’. It is house, not guns. It is liberty. It is the very definition of what America IS. A+ for common problems the analysis of the status quo.

F for fritzl failing to reach the only conclusion supported by common problems, the evidence, namely, that there can BE no ‘debate’ of the future of the people’s right to arms, because it is transcendent. Overall, a pretty decent job from the historic analysis standpoint, … but: David left out the key legal document from the founding of the literary, USA: The Declaration of Independence. The Declaration sets the common communication problems, context for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, since they were both written by the same people, the same revolutionaries who fought for liberty and independence from Great Britain. The Declaration lists many unalienable Rights, including the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But there is only one DUTY described in calculate that Declaration. You will find that Duty about halfway through the second paragraph of the Declaration. “But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their DUTY, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” That is the context for problems the Second Amendment’s Right to marxist keep and bear arms. Problems? It is not hunting, it is not target shooting, it is not trap shooting – it is to fulfill our duty, as free citizens (not subjects) to ensure the preservation of fritzl house individual liberty for ourselves and future generations, and to prevent our central government from becoming an “absolute Despotism”. The men who fought and died in the Revolution clearly understood that Duty.

That Duty is not served by firearms suitable for “sporting purposes”, or hunting, or trap shooting. It is served by civilian versions of the problems, same infantry firearms used by our military. And to help David understand the Robed Racists Essay, meaning of “shall not be infringed”, try putting two 6-year old kids in the back seat of communication a car, run a strip of masking tape down the middle of the seat, tell them “stay on your own side”, and take a 4-hour road trip. Those 6-year olds will be able to provide you with a very precise accounting of any “infringement” of their rights to the car seat. Josef Fritzl House? Why is that word so difficult to understand when it is common business communication, used in the Second Amendment? well researched. I am sure it got an orchard, “A” from a teacher.

Teachers grade on technical aspects of common communication problems writing and do not on the accuracy of the literary, conclusion, they can’t be an expert on every subject. Just one point, the “debate about evolving language”? The founders didn’t mean for it to “evolve”; that’s why they wrote it down. Fourth, straw purchasing, where someone who is common, prohibited from possessing a firearm uses a surrogate buyer to act for them. This statement is incorrect. According to the recent SCOTUS decision in historical materialism the Abramski case, a straw purchase is common business communication problems, when any surrogate buys a gun for another person, whether or not the other person is prohibited. An exception is made for buying a gun as a gift for a non-prohibited person. It’s a decent paper, especially for a High School student.

However, I would direct his attention to Title 10, Section 311 of the U.S. Code, which covers what a militia is: (a)The militia of the White Racists, United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the communication problems, United States who are members of the National Guard. (b)The classes of the militia are— (1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and. (2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. An examination of the Militia Acts is probably warranted, since everything else about the gun control debate is a distraction from the fact that these definitions are already codified into how to the supreme law of the land.

Focus on the good points! “From the smoothbore muskets wielded by farmers in the Revolutionary War, to the M1 Garands carried by the valiant soldiers of the U.S. Communication? Military in WWII, to the 5.56x45mm rounds being sent “downrange” from the barrels of M4s and M16s in fritzl house Afghanistan as this is being written, guns were a necessary part in the creation of our nation and continue to play an communication problems, important role in protecting America abroad. Fritzl House? But civilian ownership of guns in America is a dividing issue.” Seemed that the business communication problems, author was pushing for the military view of the 2nd. “What is a militia?

Who are “the people?” Many questions arise after reading the text. Those in favor of gun control tend to believe that the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms as a collective right, meaning one reserved for the military. Those who support gun rights believe that the Second Amendment is meant to White Racists protect the right of individuals to business bear arms.” How about some quotes from the founding fathers? Such as: “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” — George Washington. “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against the tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson. “No free men shall be debarred the use of arms.” – Thomas Jefferson. “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in materialism almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in business America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” — Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution [1787] “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves. Cherry Orchard Themes? …To preserve liberty, it is communication problems, essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” — Richard Henry Lee. “A government that does not trust it’s law abiding citizens to keep and atmosphere literary bear arms is itself unworthy of trust.” – James Madison.

“The great object is that every man be armed. . . Common Business? . Everyone who is cherry orchard, able may have a gun. . . . Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense?” – Patrick Henry. As for the Miller decision, there was no real defense presented. There was a history of military use of short barreled shotguns (which is not what they should have based their decision on) prior to the arrest and court cases. In all fairness Robert, unfortunately sometimes writing a paper like this for business communication class is as much about writing a good paper and expressing your opinion as it is about tailoring it to your teachers sentiments and walking a fine line between achieving both. Paper seemed good though overall very factual with questions put in for the reader to ask of themselves.

Without knowing the specific assignment and the length restrictions, I think getting into some underlying philosophy would liven it up a bit.