Godhead :: social issues

Godhead On May 20, 325 AD the world was forever changed. Emperor Constantine called a meeting of the 318 Bishops at Nicea and on that day they instituted one of the greatest flaws of American religion today. This is the doctrine of the Trinity, suggesting the view of the Oneness doctrine, believing on one God and His name being Jesus, is no longer correct. The Trinity doctrine cannot be proven by simply reading the scriptures; it has to be described and explained in detail, before you can begin to see the Trinitarian view. The Trinity doctrine is a doctrine of inference, not a doctrine of fact. If you ever listen or take part in a Oneness verses Trinity debate you will find that as long as they are quoting scriptures the Trinity looses ground. Hence, the doctrine of the Trinity must be â€Å"injected† into the scriptures to prove itself. One man once said â€Å"The Trinity has to be piped into Scripture before it can be piped out.† The best example is: everyone knows you can’t get milk from cotton. But, if you take the cotton and soak it in milk first then you can squeeze the milk from the cotton. In the same sense the Trinity doctrine is like this. Before you can begin to see the Trinity doctrine, someone has to tell you about it and then go to scripture to prove it as fact. By just reading the scriptures first, no one will ever find the Trinity represented, for the scriptures prove the Oneness of Jesus Christ all through the Bible. I do not understand how the doctrine of the Trinity can get around the unity of the Old Testament and New Testament stating the One God facts. Deuteronomy 6:4(NKJV) states: â€Å"Here, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:†. That sums up the doctrine of the Oneness. But, one instance will not satisfy. Here are just a few of the misconceptions of the Trinity Doctrine that cause it to be in fault: First: â€Å"Elohim† â€Å"Elohim†, meaning "God", is sometimes confused to show the plurality of the Godhead, this is not a correct interpretation. In the Hebrew words are plural in construction but singular in the way that they are used. Also the Hebrew often used plural forms to show majesty or greatness of one person or deity. Even though these are plural words, to say they represent a multiplicity in the Godhead would be wrong.

Coal :: Research Essays

Coal As the granddaughter of an Irish immigrant coal miner, I thought I knew everything there was to know about coal. I was wrong. After learning about coal rank, and the different types of coal mines, I gained a much deeper appreciation for the work of my grandfather. Being from Tamaqua, I knew what anthracite coal was as soon as I could understand my Pappy’s ramblings. Among the Top 20 Signs You’re from the Coal Region, included â€Å"You think only God has the proper resume to take over after Joe Paterno leaves Penn State† (Top Ten). Another was â€Å"You’ve eaten coal candy† (who hasn’t?) (Top Ten). However, I know now that there are different types of coal mining techniques, such as underground mining, longwall mining and shaft mining. I also learned about the different types of underground mines, like shaft mines, slope mines, and drift mines. Shaft mines are usually the deepest type of coal mine. They use elevators to vertically transport workers and equipment to the level of the coal seam. Slope mines incline from the surface to a coal seam. Drift mines have entrances to coal seams from the hillside horizontally (UMWA). My Pappy, however, was a shaft miner. I can now more easily identify with my Pappy’s old coal mining stories since he worked in a shaft mine, and I know now the general set-up of that type of mine. For instance, there are two shafts, the man shaft, and the air-shaft. Also, I learned about the different layers underground, like sandstone, shale, and limestone, before the coal seam appears. Decisions about what type of mine to construct depend on surrounding terrain and the depth of the coal (UMWA). In recent years, however, coal production has decreased in the Appalachian Region, causing plenty of Gaelic tantrums during the holidays. In 2003, Coal production in the Appalachian region declined, due to lawsuits, underground mine fires, geological problems, and depleted reserves (Annual†¦). With my newfound knowledge of coal, coal mines, and coal production, I intend to have many more intelligent conversations with my Grandfather in the years to come. Coal :: Research Essays Coal As the granddaughter of an Irish immigrant coal miner, I thought I knew everything there was to know about coal. I was wrong. After learning about coal rank, and the different types of coal mines, I gained a much deeper appreciation for the work of my grandfather. Being from Tamaqua, I knew what anthracite coal was as soon as I could understand my Pappy’s ramblings. Among the Top 20 Signs You’re from the Coal Region, included â€Å"You think only God has the proper resume to take over after Joe Paterno leaves Penn State† (Top Ten). Another was â€Å"You’ve eaten coal candy† (who hasn’t?) (Top Ten). However, I know now that there are different types of coal mining techniques, such as underground mining, longwall mining and shaft mining. I also learned about the different types of underground mines, like shaft mines, slope mines, and drift mines. Shaft mines are usually the deepest type of coal mine. They use elevators to vertically transport workers and equipment to the level of the coal seam. Slope mines incline from the surface to a coal seam. Drift mines have entrances to coal seams from the hillside horizontally (UMWA). My Pappy, however, was a shaft miner. I can now more easily identify with my Pappy’s old coal mining stories since he worked in a shaft mine, and I know now the general set-up of that type of mine. For instance, there are two shafts, the man shaft, and the air-shaft. Also, I learned about the different layers underground, like sandstone, shale, and limestone, before the coal seam appears. Decisions about what type of mine to construct depend on surrounding terrain and the depth of the coal (UMWA). In recent years, however, coal production has decreased in the Appalachian Region, causing plenty of Gaelic tantrums during the holidays. In 2003, Coal production in the Appalachian region declined, due to lawsuits, underground mine fires, geological problems, and depleted reserves (Annual†¦). With my newfound knowledge of coal, coal mines, and coal production, I intend to have many more intelligent conversations with my Grandfather in the years to come.

Ones Socialization

There are many factors that play a major role in our socialization; from military to media. Determining and regulating how much influence they have un us is something we have little control over. My group and I had the opportunity to further expand our knowledge on three patterns; Time Orientation pattern, Social Relations Orientation pattern and Bond†s Moral Discipline. Through this essay I intend to explain how the Social Relations and Time Orientation pattern among other related factors have greatly influenced who I am. The Social Relations Orientation describes how the people in a culture organize themselves and relate to each other. The book asks â€Å"to what extent are some people in the culture considered better or superior to others?† (Lustig& Koester 90). Easy to say that Mexican American†¦ celebrate status differences†( Lustig & Koester 91) based mostly one economic status. It is so unfortunate that a society could stereotype a group of people without considering an important factor such as opportunity. In Mexico most people fall under two categories: â€Å"fresas† & â€Å"nacos†. â€Å"Fresas† can be translated into preppie, and the closest translation I could find for naco would be all those who lack education and class. Growing up I attended mostly private schools, which were made up of all sorts of people, but mostly â€Å"fresas† because they were the ones who could afford it. I remember having a friend called Leyra, she had to be the most stuck up person I had ever met. She was the kind of girl who would always judge the book by its cover, she was the kind of girl who as soon as you walked in the room would check the tags of your clothes to see if they were designer made. Fortunately I had the opportunity to be with her all through highschool, and realize that that was one person I did not want to be like. I learned many things from Leyra, the most important being never to judge a book by its cover rather its content. Education has next to my family been the most important factor in socialization, which was enforced by my family. My family and I strongly believe that as long as you live under their roof they have a say so in what you do or don†t do. My family up until a few years back was responsible for the direction my life was headed. When I lived with my aunt I felt deprived of my freedom, she chose what school I went to and classes I took I am not saying that they were not beneficial, but they were not classes that I chose. I enjoy relating to people as my equals, and address them based on the occasion not their economic status. I see myself as a member of many groups not just one. I have always had a problem belonging to just one group, I believe in having the best of all worlds. I also believe in being nurtured from the past, living in the present and looking forward to the future. Learning to let go is vital to move on, and this is something my culture is bad at. It seems as though there is not enough time in ones day carry out all activities and enjoy life at the same time. One should value time in the past, present and future. In Mexican American cultures â€Å"The day of the dead† which is considered a national holiday is one of the biggest celebrations of the year. We take this time to remember all of the loved ones who cannot be with us. It lets us think about the things we do have in order to not take them for granted. There is such a thing called â€Å"Mexican time†. Mexican time refers to arriving an hour later to what ever event you are going. We usually think well they say to be there at 7:00, but by the time everything is ready it will be 8:00, so if I arrive at 8:00 I†ll e right on time, and I wont loose any time waiting. This has cause me problems. I am always late thinking it is ok. I have been late to important meetings at work, to important classes and to everything else I do. It is embarrassing and something very hard to change. There are always certain things in a culture such as being late that one could do without. I was taught by my family that in life we do not always get our way or do what we want. I was also taught that education will provide one with the most powerful tool in life: Knowledge.

Outline the key theoretical claims of restorative justice and critically evaluate its advantages and disadvantages as applied to contemporary punishment practices in the UK.

Abstract Restorative justice describes various processes designed to correct the harm that the criminal inflicts on it’s victims and communities (Braithwaite,1999). It requires all parties; victims, offenders and communities, to establish ways of repairing the harm of crime and prevent it from happening again (Strickland, 2004, Cornwell, 2009). Although such practices may be seen as a more equitable and humane form of justice, it has been criticised for extending the criminal justice system (net-widening) (Garland, 2001) and for it’s propensity to ‘privatise’ the justice estate, by its use of informal and less accountable forms of, what Foucault refers to as ‘governmentality’ (Foucault, 1975, Pavlich, 2013). However, research shows that restorative justice has been successful in reducing reoffending rates and more significantly, giving a voice to the victims of crime, previously ignored by the prevailing criminal justice system. Introduction Restorative justice describes various processes designed to correct the harm that the criminal inflicts on it’s victims and communities (Braithwaite,1999). It requires all parties; victims, offenders and communities, to establish ways of repairing the harm of crime and prevent it from happening again (Strickland, 2004, Cornwell, 2009). This paper will explore the conceptual underpinnings of the restorative approach that will examine it’s development within the theoretical and practical framework of contemporary punishment practices. It will argue that those who advocate restorative justice claim that traditional ways of responding to harm tend to neglect the needs of victims and communities (Braithwaite, 1999). Van Ness & Strong (2010) contend that the prevailing policies and practices of the criminal justice system focus entirely on the offender as law breaker, that only address legal guilt and punishment (Stohr et al,2012). Further, over the last three decades, within the context of the rise of neo-liberal populism, that has seen decline of the rehabilitative ideal, restorative justice practices have the potential to mitigate the worst excesses of punitive punishments (Garland, 2001). However, the theoretical underpinnings of restorative justice, as this paper will show, has been attacked in various ways, due, in part, to its propensity to either be seen as undermining the impartiality of the criminal justice system, or as yet another form of what Foucault (1975) describes as ‘governmentality’. From this perspective, restorative justice is seen as an informal process that results in a net-widening of state control (Garland, 2001, Pavlich, 2013). This, in turn, has generated a significant ideological debate over the future of criminal justice (Johnstone & Van Ness, 2007). Proponents of restorative justice, however, argue that within the prevailing punitive regime, the increase in custodial sentences has generated a penal crisis that may be mitigated by the use of restorative approaches (Cavadino & Dignan, 2006). Restorative justice may therefore be seen as a significant and pragmatic means of lowering the rate of recidivism and bringing about a more humane and equitable justice (Sim, 2008, Cornwell, 2009). The Demise of the Rehabilitative Ideal Since the eighteenth century, idea’s surrounding state punishment have led to a mixture of approaches that prevail today (Stohr et al, 2012). Clarkson, 2005, suggests that these theories in turn have generated continual discourse surrounding the moral justifications for punishment, which are; retributivism, deterrence, rehabilitation and incapacitation. Sim (2009), citing Foucault, argues that although the prevailing literature on the history of the criminal justice system has placed an emphasis on the shifts and discontinuities in the apparatus of punishment, such as the move from retributive punishment toward a more progressive rehabilitative approach, since the mid 1970s punishment has been underpinned and legitimated by a political and populist hostility to offenders (ibid, Garland 2001, Cornwell, 2009). Garland (2001) argues that the last three decades has seen a shift away from the assumptions and ideologies that shaped crime control for most of the twentieth century. To day’s practices of policing and penal sanctions, Garland argues, pursue new objectives in a move away from the penal welfarism (rehabilitation) that shaped the 1890s?1970s approach of policy makers, academics and practitioners. Cornwell (2009) argues that although the rehabilitative model of punishment was seen as a progressive approach in the middle years of the last century, when it was widely accepted that the provision of ‘treatment and training’ would change the patterns of offending behaviour, the ideology failed to work out in practice (Garland, 2001). In turn, there became a disenchantment with the rehabilitative approach, and the ‘Nothing Works’ scenario became an accepted belief, given the reality of prison custody (Martinson, 1974). Muncie (2005) claims that the 1970s neo-liberal shift in political ideology saw the rehabilitative welfare model based on meeting individual needs, regress back towards a ‘justice model’ (retributi ve), that is more concerned with the offence than the offender. From the 1990s, Muncie argues, ‘justice’ has moved away from due process and rights to an authoritarian form of crime control. The Prison Crisis Cornwell (2009) claims that the effect of the ‘justice model’ on the prison population cannot be overstated (Sim, 2008). In England and Wales in 1990 the average daily prison population stood at around 46,000, by 1998 this figure increased to over 65,000, by 2009 the number rose to 82,586 (ibid). Further, the findings in the 2007 Commission on Prison’s suggest that a ‘crisis’ now defines the UK penal system (The Howard League, 2007). Despite a 42,000 decline in reported crime since 1995, the Commission argue, the prison population has soared to a high of 84,000 in 2008, more than doubling since 1992. Cornwell (2009) claims that at present the costs of keeping an offender in prison stands at around ?40,000 per year, where the estimated cost of building new prisons to accommodate the rise of the prison population will take huge resources of public money. Prison has therefore become the defining tool of the punishment process, where the United Kingdom (U K) now imprisons more of its population than any other country in Western Europe (ibid: p.6). A History of Restorative Justice In response to the prison crisis, experimentation in the 1990s began to see various forms of restorative justice models in order to mitigate retributive punishment and as a means of re-introducing a greater emphasis on the rehabilitation ideal (Muncie, 2005). The arguments for restorative forms of justice, Cornwell (2009) claims, are not just about cost and sustainability on national resources, but more significantly, the notion of the type of unjust society the United Kingdom (UK) is likely to become unless this surge in punitive sanctions is not abated (ibid, Sim, 2009). Cornwell (2009) suggests that the main strength of the restorative justice model is that it is ‘practitioner led’, deriving from the practical experience of correctional officials and academics who have a comprehensive understanding of the penal system. From a ‘Nothing Works’ (Martinson, 1974) to a ‘What Works’ experience, the emphasis of restorative justice has been to identi fy a more humane, equitable and practical means of justice that goes beyond the needs of the offender (rehabilitative goal) toward addressing the victims and their communities (Cornwell, 2009). Restorative Justice ? Theory and Practice Howard Zehr (2002), envisioned restorative justice as addressing the victim’s needs or harm that holds offenders accountable to put right the harm that involves the victims, offenders and their communities (Zehr, 2002). The first focus is on holding the offender accountable for harm, the second is the requirement that in order to reintegrate into society, offenders must do something significant to repair the harm. Third, there should be a process through which victims, offenders and communities have a legitimate stake in the outcomes of justice (Cornwell, 2009.p:45). In this way, Zehr (2002) redefines or redirects the harm of crime away from its definition of a violation of the state, toward a violation of one person by another. At the same time, the focus of establishing blame or guilt shifts toward a focus on problem solving and obligations. As a result, communities and not the state become the central facilitators in repairing and restoring harm (ibid). Although restorative justice has received wide recognition across many western countries together with the endorsement of the Council of Europe in 1999, progress toward the implementation of restorative justice principles into mainstream criminal justice practices is slow (Cornwell, 2009). Further, restorative justice, both in theory and practice continues to generate a substantial and contentious debate (Morris, 2002). Restorative Justice ? A Critique Acorn (2005) argues that ‘justice’ has traditionally symbolised the scales of impartiality on the one hand, and the sword of power, on the other. Justice is thereby possible when a neutral judge calculates a fair balance of accounts to make decisions that are backed by state power. Restorative justice, by its practice of informal dispute resolutions, can be seen as a call to a return of a ‘privatised’ form of justice (ibid, Strang & Braithwaite, 2002). This criticism is qualified by the propensity of restorative justice advocates (Braithwaite, 1989) that critique punitive justice responses and thereby view the power of the state as harmful. This in turn, at least theoretically, erodes state power and state created crime categories, thereby threatening to create a ‘privatised’ justice process (Strang & Braithwaite, 2002). Within this process, Strang & Braithwaite (2002) argue, restorative justice cannot be seen to ‘legitimately’ deal with crimes. Acorn (2004) suggests that unlike the prevailing criminal justice system, the desire to punish (retribution) is replaced by a version of justice that is centred on specifically nuanced concepts of harm, obligation, need, re-integration and forgiveness. Such values guide Family Group Conferences, Community Mediation, Victim-Offender Commissions and various forms of tribunals (Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)) (MacLaughlin et al, 2003). Family Group Conferences is a prominent practice in restorative justice, that includes community members (paid or unpaid) to ‘hear’ disputes and help parties to resolve conflicts. However, rather than a diversion from the criminal justice system, such conferences involve offenders already convicted (Acorn, 2004). Garland (2001) views this arrangement a form of ‘net-widening’, where informal justice becomes part of the social landscape that encompasses a widening and ever expanding form of crime control (ibid) . Although restorative justice advocates argue that informal justice creates domains of freedom that empower victims, offenders and communities, opponents claim that restorative justice represents another pernicious way in which community mediation expands state control, while claiming to do precisely the opposite (Acorn, 2004, Garland, 2001, Pavlich, 2013). Restorative justice proponents are clear in their critique of the criminal justice system that is seen to not represent victims or their communities, where state officials, such as the police, lawyers and judges, are impartial, and thereby have no direct understanding of those affected by criminal offenses (Pavlich, 2013). Here, Pavlich refers to Foucault’s concept of ‘governmentality’, where the state subtly arranges the background settings to produce subjects who think and act in ways that do not require direct coercion, in what Foucault terms the ‘conduct of conduct’ (Pavlich, 2013, Foucault, 1975). In this way, Foucault argues, self governed subjects are produced when they buy into the logic and formulated identities of a given governmentality (Foucault, 1975). Garland and Sparks (2000) claim that restorative justice, as a form of govermentality has, in part, come about by the increased attention, over the last twenty-five years, toward the rights of the ‘victim’. Here, Garland (2001) argues that the last two decades has seen the rise of a distinctly populist current in penal politics that no longer relies on the evidence of the experts and professional elites. Whereas a few decades ago public opinion functioned as an occasional restraint on policy initiatives, it now operates as a privileged source. Within this context, Garland argues, victims have attained an unprecedented array of ‘rights’ within the criminal justice system, ranging from; ‘the right to make victim impact statements’, the right to be consulted in prosecutions, sentencing and parole together with notifications of offenders post release movements and the right to receive compensation. Further, the right to receive service provision ent ails the use of Victim Support agencies who help people address their feelings and offer practical help and assistance, mitigating the negative impact of crime (Reeves and Mulley, 2000). Wright (2000) suggests that while such developments may be seen as a triumph for victim support movements, these reforms do not fundamentally alter the structural position of victims. This, Wright explains, is because the punitive structural system remains intact whereby the victim’s interests will necessarily remain secondary to the wider public interest, represented by the crown (Wright, 2000). It can be argued that while critics may be seen as correct in their perception of restorative justice as a form of governmentality or net-widening by the state, the attack may be seen as premature, given the early stages of its development (Cornwell, 2009). Cornwell argues that critics have not given restorative justice enough time to develop and potentially emerge as a stand alone resolution to the problem of crime and its repercussions for the victims, offenders and their communities (ibid). Restorative justice programmes are still at an embryonic stage, where they are attracting critique, mainly due to their attachment to the Criminal Justice System (Cornwell, 2009, Morris, 2002, Ministry of Justice, 2012). Cornwell (2009) also addresses the argument that the restorative approach places too much emphasis on the status it affords to the victims of crime. In reality, Cornwell suggests, that status is very much based on political rhetoric rather than actual reform. The publication of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 that anticipated an advance in restorative and reparative measures into the criminal justice system, in reality bought in a much more punitive provision. Restorative measures under the Act are initiated on the basis of a ‘mix and match’ arrangement for ‘custody plus minus’. Here, (Garrielides, 2003) points out that restorative justice has therefore become somewhat removed from its underlying theory (Garrielides, 2003). Put simply, the restorative approach has been cherry picked to support other punitive initiatives, leaving its central tenets at the margins of the criminal justice system (Cornwell, 2009). Restorative Justice – Does it Work? Since the 1990s a number of restorative justice trial schemes began to take place, in order to measure success in terms of re-offending and victim satisfaction. According to a Ministry of Justice Report (Shapland et al, 2008), measuring the success of restorative justice against criminal justice control groups, it was found that offenders who took part in restorative justice schemes committed statistically significantly fewer offences (in terms of reconvictions) in the subsequent two years than offenders in the control group. Further, although restorative justice has been generally reported to be more successful within youth justice, this research showed no demographic differences, for example; in age, ethnicity, gender or offence type. The report also showed that eighty-five percent of victims were happy with the process (ibid). These results are reflected in various case studies. Published by the Restorative Justice Council (2013) the following gives an example of the positive impa ct that restorative justice can have on the victim, the offender and communities: Arrested in February last year, Jason Reed was sentenced to five years in prison after admitting to more than fifty other burglaries. During the criminal justice process, Jason expressed his wish to start afresh and make amends, so he was referred to the post-conviction restorative justice unit. After a full assessment to ensure his case was suitable for restorative justice measures, three conferences took place between Jason and five of his victims. The victims had different motivations for taking part and they were able to express their upset and anger directly to the offender. Jason agreed to pay back an agreed amount of compensation and the victims showed some acceptance and forgiveness (Restorative Justice Council, 2013). Conclusion Overall, this paper has argued that restorative justice may be seen as an attempt to address the disillusion within the criminal justice system in the 1970s that had conceded that ‘Nothing Works’. The demise of the rehabilitative ideal (Garland, 2001), against the backdrop of political shifts toward a neo-liberal ideology, bought about a more punitive, retributive stance toward punishment and offending (Sim, 2008). As a result, the rise in prison populations has bought about a penal crisis. In response, new initiatives in restorative justice began to develop, emerging as a more equitable, humane form of punishment (Cornwell, 2009). The advantages of the restorative approach cannot be overstated, as this paper shows, rather than the state focusing on the offender (as is the case with the prevailing criminal justice system), restorative justice seeks to address the needs of the victim and community participation (Zehr, 2002). In practical terms, there appears to be some su ccess in terms of re-offending and victim satisfaction (Ministry of Justice, 2008). Despite the criticisms (Garland, 2001), it can be argued that restorative justice demonstrates an opportunity and potential to mitigate the worst excesses of the criminal justice system and bring about a more equitable and humane approach (Cornwell, 2009). Word count: 2654 Bibliography Acorn, A (2004) Compulsory Compassion: A Critique of Restorative Justice. Vol 14, No.6 (June 2004) pp. 446-448. University of British Columbia Press Bottoms, A, Gelsthorpe, S Rex, S (2013) Community Penalties: Change & Challenges. London: Wilan Publishing Cavadino, M & Dignan, J (2006) Penal Systems: A Comparative Approach. London: Sage Publications Clarkson, M (2005) Understanding Criminal Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell Cornwell, D (2009) The Penal Crisis and the Clapham Omnibus: Questions and Answers in Restorative Justice. Hampshire: Waterside Press Dupont-Morales, M, Hooper, M, Schmidt, J (2000) Handbook of Criminal Justice Administration. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc. Garland, D (2001) Culture of Control: Crime & Social Order in Contemporary Society. Oxon: Oxford University Press Garland, D & Sparks, R (2000) Criminology & Social Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Garrielides, T (2003) Restorative Justice Theory and Practice: Mind the Gap! Available[online]from: http://www.euforum.org/readingroom/Newsletter/Vol04Issue03.pdf The Howard League for Prison Reform (2007) Do Better, Do Less: The report of the Commission on English Prisons Today. The Howard League. Available [online] from: http://www.howardleague.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/online_publications/Do_Better_Do_Less_res.pdf Accessed on 26th February 2014-02-27 Johnstone, G (2011) Restorative Justice: Ideas, Values, Debates: Second Edition. Oxon: Wilan Publishing Marshall, T (1996) The Evolution of Restorative Justice in Britain. European Journal on Criminal Police and Research (4) 21-43 McLaughlin, E, Fergusson, R, Hughes, G, Westmaland, L (2003) Restorative Justice: Critical Issues. London: The Open University Ministry of Justice (2012) Restorative Justice Action Plan for the Criminal Justice System. November 2012 Available [online] from: http://www.restorative_justice_action_plan.pdf Morris, A (2002) Critiquing the Critics: A Brief Response to Critics of Restorative Justice. British Journal of Criminology (2002) 42 (3): 596-615 Muncie, J (2005) The Globalization of Crime Control: the Case of Youth and Juvenile Justice: Neo-Liberalism, Policy Convergence & International Conventions. Theoretical Criminology 9 (1) pp: 35-64 Raynor, P, Robinson, G (2009) Rehabilitation, Crime and Justice. London: Palgrave Macmillan Restorative Justice Council (2013) Case Studies Available [online] from: http:www.restorativejustice.org.uk/?p=resources&keyword=178 Accessed on: 27th February 2014 Reeves, H & Mulley,K (2000) The New Status of Victims in the UK: Threats and Opportunities, cit in: Crawford, A and Goodey, J (eds) Integrating a Victim Perspective Within Criminal Justice Debates. Aldershot: Ashgate Press Robinson, G & Crow, I (2009) Offender Rehabilitation: Theory, Research & Practice. London: Sage Publications Shapland, J, Atkinson, A, Atkinson, H, Dignan, J, Edwards, L, Hibbert, J, Howes, M, Johnstone, J, Robinson, G and Sorsby, A (2008) Does Restorative Justice Effect Reconviction. The fourth report from the evaluation of three schemes. Ministry of Justice 2008. Available [online] from: http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/resource/ministry_of_justice_evaluation_does_restorative_justice_affect_reconviction_the_fourth_report_from_the_evaluation_of_three_schemes/ Accessed on 26th February 2014 Sim, J (2009) Punishment and Prisons: Power and the Carceral State.London: Sage Publications Limited Stohr, M, Walsh, A, Hemmens, C (2012) Corrections, a text/reader, Second Edition. London: Sage Publications. Strickland, R.A (2004) Studies in Crime & Punishment. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc Sumner, C (2008) The Blackwell Companion to Criminology. London: John Wiley & Sons Wright, M (2000) Restorative justice and Mediation. Paper presented at the conference â€Å"Probation Methods in Criminal Policy: Current State and Perspectives† at Popowo, Poland, 20-21 October. Available [online] from: http://www.restorativejustice.org/10fulltext/wrightmartin2000restorative/view Accessed on: 28th February 2014 Zehr, H (2002) Little Book of Restorative Justice. New Zealand: The Little Books of Justice and Peace Building

Communities of Practice: Learning, Meanings, and Identity Essay

Introduction                     A community simply refers to a group of people living together in unity and harmony and coordinating with each other to perform various task and responsibilities which benefit everyone involved. It can also be referred to as a form of social unit which is made of people who share common values, attitudes, interest and even have common goals that they would like to achieve together (Wenger, 72). Self and others simply refers to a situation whereby one strives for their own development while at the same time encouraging others to achieve their own development. It calls for working together not just for ones won benefit but also for the benefit of others. This relates to the principle of a community whereby everyone looks after each other and values the interest of others in addition to their own. The various kinds of communities which exist include, the communities made of people with the same interest or share the same passion, a community of people who try to bring change through their actions, a community of people who are brought together as a result of the geographical location and boundaries they share. Furthermore, there are communities of people who share similar practice or share the same kind of profession, and last but not least there are communities which are brought together as result of the similar external situations or events which affect all of the people involved (Wenger, 72). All these communities can be classified as centralized, de-centralized or even distributed communities. An individual ensures that the common objectives and goals of the whole community are achieved by providing their contribution and playing their role in the community. In addition, an individual shows respect, cooperation and participates actively. The community on the other hand, ensures that an individual achieves personal development, safety, and general well-being in addition to satisfaction. As an individual, I belong to the student body of my school which represents my interests and looks after my welfare as a student. My duties include my active participation in ensuring that I follow the school rules, make annual contributions to the student body and participate in elections when selecting new student leaders. The technological advancements have transformed the understanding of community to that of people who are found on the same social network and can interact without minding each others’ development or interests. Technology has brought virtual communities which only exist through internet connections although they still may share common interests (Chayko, 4). The current understanding of community relates to the interactions on social networks and the physical touch no longer exists. References Chayko, Mary. Portable Communities: The Social Dynamics of Online and Mobile Connectedness. Albany: SUNY Press, 2008. Print. p.4 Wenger, Etienne. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meanings, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Print. p.72 Source document

World Wide Project War Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

World Wide Project War - Essay Example Principally there are 3 schools of thoughts. The first one introduces the "just war" concept. The second is called Pacifism and the third is Realism. The three are totally different than each other. Pacifism believes that there is no moral justification of war. Realism on the other hand believes that there is no such thing as morals in international relations and a moral justification is not required. The only thing that matters is the country and national interests. The just war theory explains that a nation should justify the war before it wages war and it forms the basis of the present international law. Both the three ideologies play an important role in determining if a country will go to war or not, depending on the relative support to each ideology and the effectiveness of the arguments used by the leadership to rally the masses. Let's take the war on Iraq as the main theme for this project. Pacifist, and those "just war supporters", who think that there was not any justification for launching the war are at the forefront of opposing this war. The anti war movement reflected the basic pacifist belief that war can never be justified and it criticized different war justifications and complained against sending the American children to attack another nation. A nation that had never murdered a single American citizen (according to Michel Moore's "September 11") The reports by the government on Iraqs weapons were dismissed by the war opposition as fraud. They believed that the Iraq war will most probably increase the already existing hatred towards the United States throughout the Arab world. The government was accused of ignoring the main source of instability and anger in the region, which is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and instead was creating more instability in its quest for "Oil" resources. The anti war activists described the major outcome of the Iraq war. Just like any other war, the results would be a shocking loss. Those who will die will lose their future; their families will lose their beloved ones. Those who are wounded and disabled will lose hope and aspiration. The attacked nation will lose property, environment health and resources. It will be an American responsibility to rebuild what was destroyed and some believed that the money required for the war should be used to improve local conditions in the country and that such a responsibility should be avoided by not avoiding the whole idea of war. This motion was raising proportional to the increased causalities among the American soldiers in Iraq. No weapons of mass destruction were discovered. No real stability in Iraq was created. And the Arab population in the neighboring countries labeled the new formed government in Iraq an American puppet. The anti war activists believe that the American public was misguided by the administration about the real reason of the war in Iraq. In their view, all the justifications presented to justify the war were proved to be manipulated by the government. Anti war officials add several other points to the argument. They believe

Macro Economics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Macro Economics - Essay Example 2011, p.204. The central bank of England has a duty to regulate the amount of money in the economy through various instruments at its disposal hence stabilizing economic inflation. These strategies are used by the central bank of England to control the rate of inflation, either by encouraging the public to spend more, or lowering their spending rate depending on the prevailing economic conditions (Joyce, et.al. 2010, p. 176). Central bank applies both conventional and unconventional strategies to regulate the rate of inflation in United Kingdom. In order for the central bank to plan the means they will use to manipulate the rate of inflation in the economy effectively, they should be able to predict the trend of economic advancement at least two years in advance. When the central bank of England increases the amount of money in circulation, they encourage public to spend more, thus pushing the rate of inflation high (Benford.et.al, 2009, p.48). If the central bank decreases the amoun t of money in circulation, they will discourage people to spend more hence reduce the rate of inflation. Asset Purchases financed by Central Bank Money: Quantitative Easing High inflation results to overspending by both individuals and business. This results to decline in saving power of the consumers (Benford.et.al, 2009, p.47). It also affects the lending power of the financial institutions. The central bank of England has mandate to regulate the rate of inflation of the country by playing around with the interests which they charge the financial institutions. During the time of high inflation, the central bank of England will increase the interest rates of the lenders. This high interest rate has an effect of reducing the lending rate so as to lower the rate of spending. The central aims to achieve this by discouraging borrowers from acquiring expensive loans. As the individuals and businesses borrow fewer funds from the financial institutions, the money in circulation