Recent orders
Introduction.
Review
Name of Student
Institutional Affiliation
Introduction.
Chapter five seeks to explain the law enforcement process and how law enforcement officers apply it mainly to minority groups. This topic has been aggressively brought up in several situations, especially by the target groups, which are blacks and other minor races in the United States. This chapter also exposes the police brutality on small races and the law enforcement officers undoing’s to uphold and follow the law with its strict conformity. In the review of this chapter, I will also discuss some case studies and how the people from the minor races were mishandled and lacuna in the law.
General information in Chapter Five.
This chapter addresses the plight of the minority groups and the pride of the police offices. The section reveals several encounters between blacks and police officers. These encounters general have not been better experiences that one will look forward to encountering as they offer the worst experiences. I mean, what would be worse than death, injury, and degradation of human dignity? The chapter also asks pertinent questions regarding the treatment of Africans by the police and gives explicit experiences for young blacks as well as aspiring police officers.
Why I recommend you to read Chapter Five.
To begin with, chapter five is resourceful to giving personal views with the people who have directly and indirectly experienced police brutality. The own experiences help to equip us better to handle such scenarios when we find ourselves in such situations. I think as well; such examples make us understand the perspective thinking from the police’s point of view and why they melt such force and suspicion to the minor groups. This chapter explores several cases that one thinks the law enforcement officers used unnecessary excessive force on the black. For instance, Cassie, a 21-year-old, her cousin was shot just because they were fighting. The police, in this case, used excessive force, it’s pretty standard for young adults to altercate and even have a fight. The police should have separated and advised or give a warning instead of robbing someone’s life. The blacks also are ill-treated in the streets even by minor mistakes that the police shouldn’t involve themselves in. I would suggest that it is unnecessary for someone to call the cops on young blacks waling on the street just because they think they may have drugs. The way the police react when they see and when arrest blacks are as well dehumanizing as the constitution clearly states how and on which circumstances an individual can be arrested. The law enforcement officers break this protocol when dealing with blacks. Therefore, I would agree that such scenarios help blacks with resourceful experience on how they can handle such cases.
Secondly, it gives us a resource to use so that the police brutality can be checked and speak against it. Social media has been so useful to reach people worldwide with whatever message you want to pass. Through these, we can get masses that will be willing to protest against such vices and condemn the brutality melted on the minor groups. For instance, from chapter five, we get some people who used social media, and in turn, they helped check the police brutality.
Furthermore, the police bias and degradation of the "good force" gives prospective police officers how better to handle situations. Most African American people think that the police are an excellent department. Although, outright impunity by the men and women in uniform have slowly but surely brought down the right name of the department. The racist target of African American, even for the minors, is unwarranted. With this knowledge, any prospective police officer will make better and informed decisions. Much more information can be accessed by reading chapter five.
Moreover, the most exciting fact about chapter five gives reasons as to why the minor groups refer to the police as the gang. The cops always defend one another in an instance that they have broken the law. The police also attack in combat. All these characteristics resemble those of the gangs; they seek to protect their own. Also, their manner of communication in combat it is signs that they are the only ones who understand. This chapter is exciting; therefore, I recommend that it should be read as you seek to understand the thinking of both police and the minor group on their views about police brutality.
On the more negative note, the chapter also introduces us to the psychological suffering of the blacks. The section notes many instances of the blacks being killed without reason and especially when they do not retaliate. Those who have witnessed the police brutality and psychologically affected and one question is there anything the government is doing to stop such attacks and help the individuals’ post-police cruelty.
The Target Audience.
This chapter can be read by blacks, law enforcement officers, and educational researchers. It provides useful information to these groups. For instance, it has statistics necessary for educational researches to explain a given phenomenon in their papers.
The chapter can be read in a single sitting as its information is straightforward, and it is written in about forty pages, from page 97 to 139.
Conclusion.
This chapter reveals the evils and the shortcomings of the police; it uses a softer language to denounce police brutality. I would suggest that you read this chapter to get information that you may require for knowledge’s sake and other endeavors in academics. The info helps us to reflect on many helpful issues.
Comparative Analysis of A good man is hard to find and Trifles
Name
Professor
Course
Date
Comparative Analysis of A good man is hard to find and Trifles
Murder is one of the unfortunate acts that the society experiences from time to time. Most of the murder cases that society witnesses are conventional in nature. This makes them predictable placing them in the category of a majority of cases. The norm however becomes challenged in some situations due to the characteristic of the cases. This in turn, becomes a source of inspiration for writers who choose to take on such stories. The analysis of such books is essential so as to find out the factors that differentiate them from the norm. The selected books in this case challenge the conventional value of murder making them an ideal source of analysis (Gainor, p. 234).
The purpose of this paper is to analyze dramatic verses narrative techniques by comparing and contrasting techniques by challenging how two books portray the conventional value of death. The books in question are Susan Glaspell’s, Trifles and Flannery O’Conner’s good men are hard to find.
Summary of Trifles
Based on a true story, Susan Glaspell’s Trifles covers the events that lead to the murder of a local farmer, John Wright. The main suspect happens to be Minnie Wright, who is the wife of the farmer. The accused is alleged to have struck her husband twice with an ax in the head as he slept. These accusations are contrary to the initial evidence that suggested the presence of buglers in their marital home. Evidence provided against Mrs. Wright mentions that she was unhappy in her marriage to the farmer. This weakens her case in that all fingers point towards her. As a result, authorities immediately find Mrs. Wright guilty sentencing her to life in prison. Glaspell with the help of her husband documents the events that transpire during the trial. This documentation forms the basis of the book trifles who main theme talks about the battle of sexes (Gainor, p. 241).
Summary of a good man is hard to find
The story starts when a family is planning their family vacation. The family is caught between a dilemma on whether to go to Florida or forgo the trip. The father is for the former while the grandmother is for the latter. The grandmother forms the basis of her argument on the fact that the misfit is on the loose. Despite her prediction, the family chooses to ignore her hypothesis ruling it out as propaganda. During the journey, the grandmother takes on her role as the story teller. She does this by explaining how it is hard to find and trust a good man in the present day. She also continues to embrace the idea of the presence of the misfit. The family continues their journey and in the process end up having an accident where no one gets hurt. In a turn of events, the family chooses to get a lift form a ‘good Samaritan’ who ironically turns out to be the dreaded misfits. The story ends with the gruesome murder of the entire family making the prediction of the grandmother true (O’Connor and Frederick, p. 231).
Comparison
Both books have similar themes in that they talk on the social roles in society. The book “A good man is hard to find”, the grandmother places emphasis on the fact that the society continues to lack good men. She does this by lecturing the couple on the social norms in the community and their impact on relationships. The family gives high regard to the practice of their religion which in this case is catholic. They thus base all their principles and values on the teaching of the Catholic religion. This makes society perceive them as responsible citizens in the community giving them a place in the category of good people. Trifles on the other hand, base its teachings on the societal roles of males and the females. Mrs. Wright does not initially fit the description of an ordinary murderer. On her quest to hide the evidence against her, she stores all the information in an area that the investigators are least likely to find, the kitchen. This turns out to be a wise choice due to the lack of focus in this area of the house. The reason for this type of reasoning is reflective of the societies division of social roles. This factor makes the investigators who are predominantly male ignorant of the possibility of a female murderer (Kennedy and Gioia, p. 314).
Both books are centered on murder cases that affect the key characters. The society is prone to experience some sort of murder mystery. Both families become the talk of the town due to the gruesome murder that they become part and parcel.
Contrast
It is established that both books revolve around murder cases. The type of murder however, differs in the case of each book. In the book Trifle’s, the storyline is different making it a murder mystery. The book is narrated by a local reporter who follows the murder trial of the accused. All the information is thus derived from her familiarity and involvement in the trial. The book is investigative in nature due to the search of the murderer by authorities. This particular case is ideal in the display of gender relations in that it showcases the sympathy the investigator has for the accused. The book differs from the conventional death due to the way the case unfolds. The victim is murdered using an ax which ideally a farming tool making the case symbolic seeing as the victim is a farmer. The mystery is not the typical murder because women are traditionally not expected to murder their spouses using this method (Gainor, p. 231).
The book, A good man is hard to find offers a different method of murder. The storyline does not mention the event of a murder making it a possibility. The family does not expect to be involved in a murder case. Their main focus is centered on the long awaited family vacation where murder is the last thing on their mind. In a fateful turn of events, the family succumbs to a number of liabilities on their journey. This places them at the peril of the murderers who turn out to be a reality as opposed to a myth. The delivery of the story is different in that it is told from a third parties point of view ruling out the form of narrative. This is a form of dramatic story which portrays surrealism as one of its styles (Scott, p. 304).
As stated earlier, the murders occur at different times of the books. In Trifle, the murder occurs at the beginning of the book making this the climax of the narrative. The murder precedes the rest of the story making it the focal point of the storyline. This makes it qualify as a narrative in that the rest of the story is told by an observer who is directly involved in the investigation (Keller, p. 131). In the book, “A good man is hard to find” the climax is felt in the last part of the story. The book is initially themed on the significance of family and values. There idea of murder is mentioned in passing by the grandmother who question’s the safety of the vacation place. The events in the story thus lead to the main event which is the murder. This is however experienced at the end of the story making this the climax of the book (Scott, p. 314).
In conclusion, both books share a couple of similarities and differences. Both books talk of the occurrence of murders that shake the communities involved. A closer look at both books brings out the differences making them acquire different identities. The paper analyzes both books by offering comparison and contrasting features. This thus challenges the conventional value of death that readers are accustomed. A good man is hard to find talks about the influence of society in showcasing a dramatic effect. Trifle’s derives its inspiration from events that occurred making it a narrative. The analysis of the two pieces of literature is thus ideal in that it showcase stylistic devices of the books that speak of death in a not so conventional manner.
Works cited
Gainor, J E. Susan Glaspell in Context: American Theater, Culture, and Politics, 1915 – 48. Ann Arbor, Mich: Univ. of Michigan Press, 2004. Print.
Keller, Mathias. Symbolic Realism in Susan Glaspell’s Trifles. München: GRIN Verlag, 2005. Print.
Kennedy, X J, and Dana Gioia. Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. New York: Longman, 2000. Print.
O’Connor, Flannery, and Frederick Asals. A Good Man Is Hard to Find. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1993. Print.
Scott, R N. Flannery O’connor: An Annotated Reference Guide to Criticism. Milledgeville, Ga: Timberlane Books, 2002. Print.
Unit 6 Essay The Coming of the Civil War
Zyria Edwards
Hist 2111
December 7, 2019
Unit 6 Essay: The Coming of the Civil War
Preston’s addressed focused on the reasons why South Carolina felt it was time for them to secede from the Union mentioning that the North had committed heinous crimes against the south. His addressed also mentioned how the South and the North were different entities. Preston mentioned that the North had abused the south for long enough and cited this idea as a portrayal of Virginia’s connection to the south through the problem all states from the South encountered from Northern politics. He emphasized that Virginia once had power and prestige and there still was a huge possibility for this to be reclaimed. Preston also focused on the difference between the North and the South based on their ideas on politics and economy. Because the North could do without slaves and Virginia could not. Preston stated that it shared a lot with the South and used that to try and convince Virginia to join the South. His address stated that war was inevitable and wanted Virginia to align with the South once the battle began (Smith 3).
Preston cited various specific reasons for the South to Secede. One was that the Federal legislature was manipulated to shut out the interest of the Slave States significantly being the decree to shut out any territories that were not decreed Free States from joining the Union. He also said that the non-slaveholding states did not just disrespect the constitution by not enforcing the laws provided and protected by it, they enacted others to ensure that these laws were not executed. Even the simplest provisions of the constitution that protect slave owners and their property have been made a criminal offense to the extent that citizens of Slave-Holding States have been met with hostility and in most cases resulting in murder (Smith 1). Another reason for the concerns of the Slave States about the Union was that citizens from free states were invading the salve states and violating their rights in their own turf and no action was taken. The Free States even appeared to applaud these types of actions (Smith 2).
Although Abraham Lincoln termed the secession illegal, the states had the right to secede according to the provisions of the Tenth Amendment. The Union did not the right to secede and the issue was not prohibited to the states by the constitution, which left it as a reservation to the states and the people in general. However, according to Abraham Lincoln, the Constitution was an agreement between the states and seceding from the Union was an act that would undermine this agreement. This was not an argument that would have rendered secession breaking the law because there was no such provision and the liberty was left to the states because of that.
Abraham Lincoln’s first inaugural address might be supposed to have been an attempt to put the South at ease and avoid secession (Lincoln 1). In the address, he directly goes to talk to the Southern States or the Slave States for that matter and reassures them that although he was a Republican he had no interest in taking away their slave ownership rights (although he uses property rights) or their peace. He mentions that he did not intend to end the Fugitive Slave Act. He reassures that his government is focused on protecting the rights provided in the constitution, including the Fugitive Slave Act. He mentions that the difference as to whether the state or the government should enforce this Act was not a reason for the South to Panic.
President Lincoln asserts that breaking up the states was not legal because they were held together by the constitution. The only way they could do that was if the States wanted to break the contract they agreed on during the signing of the constitution. He made it clear that the North was not ready to have the South violate the contract that was the constitution by seceding from the Union. He also talked about the issue of slaves moving to territories that were not yet states which was a huge concern for the Slave States because they knew there was a high probability for these territories to be free states once they gained the status. These would mean that the Free States would outnumber the Slave States in Congress. President Lincoln went on to assure them that States from either side would come to a compromise through the support of the Supreme Court to accommodate the interest of the few Slave States.
President Lincoln outlines his duties as provided by the constitution. According to how perceives the constitution, the laws of the Union are not to be broken and it is his mandate to ensure that these laws are executed devotedly in every state. “…and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States” (Lincoln 2). He says that these are the duties bestowed upon him by the citizens of the United States and would only relent if the electoral decided otherwise or bestowed upon him different duties or altered the ones in existence. As the president, Abraham had the power to “hold, occupy and possess” every bit that belonged to the government and “to collect duties and imposts” (2). He promises to not use force unless it is for the reasons of protecting the interests of the Union in a manner that is stated above.