In the year 2013 the state of Florida passed a law indicating that texting and driving is now banned. Even though this law was passed, this law states that in order to get in trouble for this offense you must have to commit 2 offenses, which raised questions for civilians with how effective this law really is. Some residents feared that other residents (mostly referring to teenagers and other young and reckless drivers), will not be open minded to this law. In addition this may lead to some residents living in fear of others breaking the law, resulting in an accident, and having innocent people lose their lives over a simple text message that could have waited. The problem is some locals want to create a more improved exceeding, and stronger law, which is understanding but Florida is doing the best they can do at the moment to help prevent texting and driving.
In this case Honda is not liable because the safety instructions were clear in that the bikes should only be used off-road, while wearing a helmet. The boys ignored the written instruction and possibly parental instruction and an accident occurred. The manufacturer is not liable because there was no defect in the product and the written instruction were clear. The parents have to accept responsibility for the incident because the company displayed the right amount of consumer protection. Chapter 1- Ethics Question 1 Expectations for corporate behavior are constantly evolving as new issues arise as a result of changes in technology,
So now breweries cannot manufactures energy drinks with alcohol. According to "Livescience.com" (2014), While many health professionals and lawmakers are cheering the Food and Drug Administration's decision yesterday to declare caffeine an illegal and unsafe additive to manufactured alcoholic beverages, critics say the move is an infringement of consumer rights by the government. When people are speaking out against a decision made by the government, this is the demand. Anheuser-Busch could produce an energy drink with alcohol as long as there was no caffeine in it, and it would be legal and more importantly it would be a blue ocean. According to "Blue Ocean Strategy.com" (2014), "Red oceans refer to the known market space – all the industries in existence today.
Politics trumps hard-headed reason on bicycle helmets. By Chris Rissel, professor of public Health at the university of Sydney Chrish Rissel is a professor of Sydney University. His opinion piece “politics trumps hard- headed reason on bicycle helmets”. Emphasises reason and evidence in order to attempt to persuade readers that bicycle helmet laws should be relaxed. With a serious tone and general formal style, she seeks to keep emotion out of the debate, positioning the readers to feel his point of view is strongly supported by the facts and that the Queensland govern has erred in ignoring expert advice on the issue.
Critical Analysis on “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate.” Dan Gardner’s publish, “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate”, is strongly controversial in his position against increasing enforcement of drug laws, and boosting penalties for violators. He believes that you should actually limit enforcement and hardship of sentencing when it comes to drugs. Was his argument persuasive enough in the essay to actually influence his wishes into society? Personally, I don’t think so. Gardner’s ideas are too drastic and I believe he didn’t have enough support in his argument that his plans would actually decrease the murders in gang violence.
1st draft of the essay There’ve been always an argument between the benefits of commuting with public transit and cars. The famous saying, “Haste makes waste” makes this topic very clear. As America is a commuter culture, people need to find the most beneficial way to commute. According to the article “The Bus, a Modern Panacea” by Lester Detroit, student should take the bus more seriously because it could solve many individual, local and global problems. The author states that commuting with public transit has more benefits than driving a car each day to school.
Bloomberg proposed the ban on July 24 and the ban was confirmed on July 24, and banned sodas because it would have no effect on his daily life. Just because Bloomberg doesn’t drink soda doesn’t mean he has to ban it. Mayor Bloomberg said, “All we’re doing is educating.” If we want t live fat, let us. It’s our right to drink and be fat. It’s not “Nanny Bloomberg’s” decision.
Lawsuits citing First Amendment rights of panhandlers have caused many communities to abandon their pursuit. A recent legal battle with the American Civil Liberties Union cost the city of Boise, Idaho forty-five thousand dollars in reimbursement of plaintiff legal fees (Berg, 2014). Arlington Municipal Code should direct its restrictions to other venues. Rather than attempting to prevent panhandlers from begging on highway exit ramps, an ordinance should be drafted focusing on less-controversial elements of panhandling. For example, an ordinance requiring motorist to pull out of the lane of traffic and legally park their vehicle prior to engaging activity with a pedestrian would have a direct impact on panhandling without inciting constitutional issues.
Prohibition on Concealed Carry Laws: A Failure of Illinois Public Policy The current injunction on concealed carry laws in Illinois is a failure of public policy. Law-abiding citizens’ ability to possess firearms and defend themselves is a basic tenant the United States was founded on—and with recent legislation currently moving through the Wisconsin state assembly—Illinois will soon be the only state in the country barring its citizens the means to adequately protect themselves with concealed firearms. Why does Illinois continue to keep itself behind the times? What makes safety conditions in Illinois so much different than in other states? For some advocates of increased gun-control in Illinois, allowing licensed citizens to carry concealed
The criminals will not hesitate to bring harm or death. This is where owning and having a gun is mandatory. This law was design to keep gun away from criminals but it keep guns at least temporary from the law abiding citizen. This is just one of the many reasons I am against Gun control. The proponents for banning guns, and the defensive use of a gun, cannot show any proof of taking banning guns will slow the crime rate with tighter gun laws.