Less-lethal weapons

National Crime Victimization Survey data,”robbery and assault victims who used gun to resist were less likely to be attacked”. John Lott, PhD,and David Mustard. PhD, which claim “more guns equal less crime”. This shows that you don't even need to harm someone to protect yourself . We need guns for safety of our families at home or on the street and to protect our personal property we have worked

Likely Deterrent Right now, resource officers are placed in schools for protection; however, if teachers and staff are armed and trained as well, it will ward off the majority of outside threats. The likelihood of a mass shooter doing significant damage and making it out alive decreases dramatically when more trained gun carriers are present. “Fundamental to successful deterrence is creating uncertainty in the mind of an attacker so he doubts his ability to succeed” (Fitzgerald, 2013).This is

actually been able to fight it back with widespread education of basic hygiene, access to clean water and modern medicine. We have wiped out viruses that before would have once been a gruesome and painful death sentence with a simple injection that takes less than 5 seconds. Our understanding and methods of control have vastly improved in the past 200 years where superstitions, that would now sound ridiculous even with our basic understanding of disease, ran rampant. For example, in 19th century Britain

Introduction James Bond has been a popular icon since the release of Casino Royale by Ian Fleming in 1953, with many wanting to be him or to be with him (SOURCE). The franchise has created characters which encompasses the stereotypical and culturally defined characteristics that each gender should possess; with men displaying masculine features such as assertiveness and aggressiveness, while females are portrayed as secondary characters who are submissive. The latest reboot of Bond has attempted

Introduction In these modern times, are nuclear power plants feasible to every nation around the world? How about in a nation experiencing the toll of depletion of resources, destruction of nature and poverty at the same time; is it still an answer for economic growth? Is the construction of nuclear power plants an aid for the spur of development of a country or a growing threat to the environment? Do nuclear power plants serve the people best or destroy the nature best? Nuclear power plants are

most lethal weapons ever devised. This regime has already used weapons of mass destruction against Iraq's neighbors and against Iraq's people (Bush, 2003). Bush and his administration were absolute that Iraq stilled possessed leftover weapons of mass destruction from the 1980’s, or at least was very capable of redeveloping and rearming themselves. However, official reports by a weapons inspection team assembled by the UN proved otherwise. The belief that Hussein’s Iraqi regime possessed weapons of

inflicted by human weapons that predate to when hunters-gatherers once lived. This goes against the philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s theory of warfare, which opposes human nature and culture being responsible for warfare, but as being a result of civilization. Evidence says otherwise. Warfare came before civilization had begun, but differently from the war we know today. The way of life was completely different, resulting in the way humans fought to also differ; from tactics and weapons to the reasons

country becomes further populated, and weapons become increasingly lethal. For many, guns are a way of life, they are tools in which aid us to more effectively hunt, and defend against enemies both foreign and domestic. If the means of defense are stolen from a human, what would that human be left with to stop, both quickly and effectively an individual who obtains an illegal weapon from inflicting damage? That stands to be the primal reason that many Americans will not ever offer them up. The United

Officers with different levels of education have been proven to show differences in action taken. Those who are less educated statistically are more likely to to take physical action. Even the amount of experience of an officer is also a factor psychologically. The officers who were newer to the job often were more likely to react, and were more likely to use excessive

Civil War such a massacre? The Civil War was such a bloodbath because the technological advances were so far superior to the tactics of the infantry, that the weapons virtually obliterated the soldiers. Soldiers would form lines known as a battalions. In these battalions, soldiers would basically march to their deaths. In addition to weapons doing so much damage, fortification on the battlefield was far more advanced than had ever been before. The Cheveau-de-frise was the main focus of armored fortification