Boston Massacre Essays (935 words) - Boston Massacre, Thomas Preston

Boston Massacre John Hancock stated ?Let this sad tale of death never be told without a tear; let not the heaving bosom cease to burn with a manly indignation at the barbarous story . . .? during his oration of the massacre on 5 March 1774. The ?Boston Massacre? as it was called, was really not a massacre in the sense that a lot of people were slaughtered, it was a massacre in the sense that British government's authority was not to be tolerated. During the next eighteen months, tensions between the Colonists and the British would increase. On a cold morning in February 1770, eleven-year old Christopher Seider was one of several hundred adults and youths surrounding the house of ebenezer Richardson. Richardson was a known Tory informer for the British customs commissioners. Mob demonstrations protesting the Townshend Acts were common, some spontaneous and some organized. At Richardson's house the crowd was becoming unruly and started breaking windows and one stone thrown hit Richardson's wife. Richardson grabbed an unloaded musket and shoved it through one of the broken windows. Seeing the musket just seemed to add fuel to the fire and the crowd knocked down the front door. Richardson loaded and fired into the mob fatally wounding Seider who died that evening. Four days after Sieder's funeral, a British soldier named Thomas Walker of the 29th Regiment inquired about a job at John Gray's Ropewalk. It was common for a British soldier to moonlight while off duty to supplement their incomes. Ropemaker William Green told Walker ?to go clean the outhouse?. In response to the insult, a fistfight broke out between Walker and Green . Walker was beaten very badly and when he had the chance ran and enlisted some of his British peers into the fight. The fray was renewed and the soldiers were bested again. The only advantaged to either side gained from the altercation was a few aches and pains. On Monday 5 March 1770, Private Hugh White of the 29th Regiment was on guard duty at the sentry box on King Street near the Custom House. Being that the King's taxes and gold were secured at the Custom House made this sentry duty all the more high risk to the British. Captain Goldfinch, an officer of the 29th Regiment, was being taunted by several citizens for not paying his bills to local merchants. Private White recovering from the skirmish the previous night was not going to let the hooligans bother Captain Goldfinch. In response to the insults, Private White butt-stroked a teenager by the name of Edward Garrick. Over fifty townspeople started to gather and challenge both White and Goldfinch to fight. As the crowd began to get larger, the British soldiers realized that the situation was about to explode. Captain Thomas Preston's account of the massacre is the only official report on the events of the fifth of March 1770. Captain Preston, Officer of the Guard, heard that a crowd had formed in front of the Custom Hose and that the guards were hollering for help. According to his account of the incident Preston stated ?That he immediately rushed to the Custom House and formed his men in formation to prevent any harm to the guards and or destruction to the guard post.? Captain and his men then fixed bayonets and began to poke and prod the mob away from the post. He then tried to march his men back to the security of their barracks, but the crowd would not allow them to do so. Tory supporters yelled from all around the street for the soldiers to fire their weapons. Preston tried to disperse the crowd while cat calls such as ? Fire and be damned? were yelled at the British soldiers. In the mean time, Captain Preston was ordering his soldiers ?Don't fire, Don't fire? The fuse was lit when a stick flew from the crowd and hit Private Montgomery in the face. Montgomery enraged leveled his musket and fired into the crowd. All was quiet for a moment, and then the crowd surged forward into the column of soldiers. It is not clear on how long the firing continued. Eyewitness' have said anywhere from 15 seconds to

Son of Sam - Killer David Berkowitz

Son of Sam - Killer David Berkowitz David Berkowitz, better known as Son of Sam and the .44 Caliber Killer, is an infamous 1970s New York City serial killer who killed six people and wounded several others. His crimes became legendary because of the bizarre content in the letters that he wrote to the police and the media and his reasons for committing the attacks. With the police feeling the pressure to catch the killer, Operation Omega was formed, which was comprised of over 200 detectives; all working on finding the Son of Sam before he killed again. Berkowitzs Childhood Born Richard David Falco,  June 1, 1953, he was adopted by Nathan and Pearl Berkowitz. The family lived in a middle-class home in the Bronx. The couple loved and doted on their son yet Berkowitz grew up feeling rejected and scorned because of being adopted. His size and appearance did not help matters. He was larger than most of the kids his age and not particularly attractive. His parents were not social people and Berkowitz followed in that path, developing a reputation for being a loner. Berkowitz Was Plagued With Guilt and Anger Berkowitz was an average student and did not show any particular flair for any one subject. He did, however, develop into a decent baseball player which became his main outside activity. Around the neighborhood, he had a reputation for being hyper and a bully. Believing his natural mother died while giving birth to him was the source of intense guilt and anger inside Berkowitz. Some believe it was the reason for his anti-social and aggressive behavior as a child. The Death of His Mother Pearl Berkowitz had a reoccurrence with breast cancer and died in 1967. Berkowitz was devastated and became severely depressed. He viewed his mother’s death as a master plot designed to destroy him. He began to fail in school and spent most of his time alone. When his father remarried in 1971, his new wife did not get along with the young Berkowitz, and the newlyweds moved to Florida leaving 18-year-old Berkowitz behind. Berkowitz Reunites With His Birth Mother Berkowitz joined the army and after a disastrous three years, he left the service. During that time, he had his one and only sexual experience with a prostitute and caught a venereal disease. When he returned home from the army, he found out his natural mother was still alive and that he had a sister. There was a brief reunion, but eventually, Berkowitz stopped visiting. His isolation, fantasies, and paranoid delusions were now in full force. Driven by Demons On Christmas Eve 1975, Berkowitz’s â€Å"demons† drove him out into the streets with a hunting knife to find a victim to kill. Later he confessed to plunging his knife into two women, one which could not be confirmed. The second victim, 15-year-old Michelle Forman, survived the attack and was treated for six knife wounds. Soon after the attacks, Berkowitz moved out of the Bronx to a two-family home in Yonkers. It was in this home that the Son of Sam would be created. Howling dogs in the neighborhood kept Berkowitz from sleeping and in his deranged mind, he turned their howls into messages from demons that were ordering him to go kill women. He later said that in an attempt to quiet the demons, he began to do what they asked. Jack and Nann Cassara owned the home and in time Berkowitz became convinced that the quiet couple was in truth, part of the demon conspiracy, with Jack being General Jack Cosmo, commander in chief of the dogs that tormented him. When he moved away from the Cassaras into an apartment on Pine Street, he failed to escape the controlling demons. His new neighbor, Sam Carr, had a black Labrador named Harvey, who Berkowitz believed was also possessed. He eventually shot the dog, but that did not offer him relief because he had come to believe that Sam Carr was possessed by the most powerful demon of them all, possibly Satan himself. Nightly the demons screamed at Berkowitz to go kill, their thirst for blood unquenchable. The Arrest of the Son of Sam Berkowitz was eventually caught after receiving a parking ticket at the time and near the place of the Moskowitz murder. That evidence along with letters he wrote to Carr and the Cassaras, his military background, his appearance, and an arson incident, led police to his door. When he was arrested he immediately surrendered to police and identified himself as Sam, telling the police, Well, youve got me. After being evaluated, it was determined that he could stand trial. Berkowitz stood trial in August 1978 and pled guilty to six murders. He received 25 years to life for each of the murders. Berkowitzs Crime Spree July 29, 1976 – Jody Valenti and Donna Lauria were shot as they sat talking in a parked car outside Donna’s apartment. Lauria died instantly from a gunshot wound to her neck. Valenti survived the attack.October 23, 1976 – Carl Denaro and Rosemary Keenan were shot while sitting in Denaro’s parked car. Both survived, but Carl was struck in the head by one of the bullets.November 26, 1976 – Donna DeMasi and 18-year-old Joanne Lomino were walking near Joanne’s home after a late movie. Berkowitz followed them briefly, then shot them. Donna survived without suffering permanent physical harm, but Joanne was paralyzed for life.January 30, 1977 – 26-year-old Christine Freund and her fiance John Diel were shot as they sat in a parked car. Christine died and John Diel survived the attack.March 8, 1977 – Virginia Voskerichian, a Barnard College honor student was shot and killed while walking home from class.April 17, 1977 – 18-year-o ld Valentina Suriani and her 20-year-old boyfriend Alexander Esau, were shot twice. Both died as a result of gunshot wounds. Berkowitz left a letter at the scene, signed â€Å"Son of Sam.† June 26, 1977 – Judy Placido and Sal Lupu were shot while leaving a disco. Both survived although Judy was shot three times.July 31, 1977 – Bobby Violante and Stacy Moskowitz were shot in the car while parked at a lover’s lane. Stacy died from a gunshot wound to her head and Bobby lost vision in one eye and partial vision in the other eye. The Ressler Interview In 1979, Berkowitz was interviewed by FBI veteran, Robert Ressler. Berkowitz admitted that he invented the â€Å"Son of Sam† stories so that if caught he could convince the court that he was insane. He said the real reason he killed was because he felt resentment toward his mother and his failures with women. He found killing the women to be sexually arousing. Throat Slashed On  July 10, 1979, Berkowitz was giving out water to the other inmates in his section when another inmate,  William E.  Hauser, attacked him with a razor blade and slashed his throat. Berkowitz was too afraid to cooperate with the investigation despite that it nearly cost him his life. Hausers name was not released to the public until 2015 when the for Attica superintendent James Conway revealed it. Serving His Time Berkowitz is currently serving a life sentence at the maximum-security Shawangunk Correctional Facility in Wallkill after being transferred from Sullivan Correctional Facility in Fallsburg, New York where he spent several years. Since entering prison, he has become a member of the Jews for Jesus religious group. Berkowitz had refused to attend any of his parole hearings since he became eligible for possible release in 2002. However, in May 2016 he changed his mind and attended his parole hearing. Berkowitz, 63 at the time, told the parole board, â€Å"I was constantly putting myself out there to help other individuals, with kindness and compassion,† he said. â€Å"I mean, I feel that’s my life’s calling, all these years. My evaluations, and so forth, should show that to be true. I’ve done a lot of good and positive things, and I thank God for that.† He was denied parole again and his next hearing is scheduled for May 2018. Today Berkowitz is a born-again Christian and described as a model prisoner.

Health Information Technology Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Health Information Technology - Essay Example The health care plan was implemented at Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at Brookings. The project increased the ability of the center with regards to taking care of patients (Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform, 2010, p.1). HIT is useful to collect health information stored in EHRs such as registries, data, and inpatient billing systems that are used in facilitating patients care at the center. The development of Electronic Health Record project was facilitated by a variety of institutions, such as the Institute of Medicine increases the learning of health care systems. Besides, the use of the project was useful to enhance a broad range of clinical and public health activities critical to improving patient care. The project enhances applications such as quality measurement and reporting and public health surveillance of patients by the use of electronic health records (Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform, 2010, p. 1). The key stakeholders in the implementation of the project include the cancer care outcomes research and surveillance consortium (CanCORS) and federal health information experts. CanCORS facilitates the use of EHRs to develop demographics, medical information and contact in five states.Moreover, CanCORS promotes study patterns of decision-making and treatment for colorectal cancers and lung patients while federal information technology experts focus primarily on the creation of incentives for health care provision by the use of EHRs (Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform, 2010, p. 2). The stakeholders assist in moving the project forward by facilitating the utilization of the electronic health record systems in various health care centers. Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform. (May 2010). Using Information Technology To Support Better Health Care: One Infrastructure With Many Uses: Brookings, Washington, DC. Retrieved June 25, 2015 from

Corporate Structures and Governance Arrangements Coursework

Corporate Structures and Governance Arrangements - Coursework Example In the pre-bureaucratic corporate structure, there is a centralized structure with the role of strategic decision making left to the top management leaders, which is the best for solving very simple problems. This system is very common among the small corporate and mostly communication is done on one-on-one basis. Though, it lacks a fundamental role, that is, standardization of roles and responsibility, the consequences of this structure on managerial accountability is that it helps the strategic director to influence and control development and growth of the corporate organization2. How Appointment Rights and Removal Rights Differ and Their Consequences Having looked at the Hampel Report, one comes to consensus that corporate structures and governance arrangement vary from one country, an individual can use the same rights differ across the jurisdiction. The main explanation for this is that the structure of a particular and how it is governed would define how decisions and appointm ent rights come about in that particular corporation and as a result each decision comes about with its consequences3. It is how rights are allocated that would ensure that the corporation gives quality performance. For example, in a corporate structure where decision rights and appointments are left in the hands of the shareholders, there is a common tendency that the organisation would experience some positive effects in its operations. That is, the shareholders are at times driven by the desire to reap the highest revenues and profits from the company4. Therefore, it would make sure the appointment and removal of directors from the corporation is done in a transparent way and the appointments done based on merit. In countries where decision making and appointment rights are left to the chief executive officer because he/she has broader business knowledge than the shareholders. The main argument for the proponents of this structure is that the chief executive officer knows how eff ective the mangers are in their daily business operations. In fact, they know when and how to make strategic decisions. However, the consequences of this structure are that it takes a lot of time to transfer certain decision making information to the rest of the organisation. It is also tedious to make all the decisions by oneself, and in case of the appointment and dismissal of directors, then one can consider the action taken to be personal and bias, and this can bring about some unnecessary, tension, conflict and tension in the organisation5. Another different structure is that which foresees all the decisions and appointment rights based on the management, especially if the corporation is a family enterprise. This method is always considered cheaper in terms of experts/employees hiring costs. However, this structure and governance arrangement has its own demerits. Despite the savings on expenditure, decision making in this case is guided more by emotions and this out rightly aff ects the corporation negatively6. It also seeks to over centralize powers and rights to make decisions to the family members, this would mean that there might be lack of relevant information flowing down to other stakeholders of the corporation. However, it is important to note that decision rights and appointments have their own effects. Therefore, one should not be

Theory of Parabolas Essay Example for Free

Theory of Parabolas Essay A parabola is designed on a basic formula, Y=ax^2+bx+c, which allows it to achieve a curve not seen in a normal line graphed using a Y=mx+b format. To the left is a graph who’s formula is y=x^2, where a=1, b=0, and c=0. I have isolated the (a) factor to see its effects on the parabola. Below is a graph where I have changed the (a) multiple times. The result is that as the (a) decreases, the mouth of the parabola widens due to the fact that (a) is essentially the slope of the parabola. Now, watch what happens when the (a) becomes negative. Now the mouth of the parabola is opening down and as we increase (a), the parabola widens. When (a)1, the parabola closes up horizontally. So from this, we can infer that if (a) is 0, then the result will be a straight line going along the X axis which is no longer a parabola. Now we will look at how the (b) factor changes the parabola, below is the origional graph from the top of the paper except the red line represents the same parabola with a (b) added onto it. The original equation was Y=x^2(blue line) and the new equation is Y=x^2+x(red line). The change is moving the vertex of the parabola left ? and down ? but the shape of the parabola it’s self is unchanged. Here are some other examples of changing (b) in a parabola with a steady (a) As seen in the graph, (b) only moves the parabola to the sides and down (as the numbers increase, the vertex moves left and down and decreasing is vice versa), but somehow fails to move the parabola up past the point X=0 on its own (making the (a) negative will flip the parabola). So now we have a slope (a) and a vertex (b), but we still need our Y-intercept which will be our (c) As shown from the graph, our parabolas Y-intercepts match up with our (c) factor, completing the equation -Fun fact, the word parabola came from the Greek words para, meaning beside, and bole, meaning to throw

Taking Our Freedom for Granted Essay -- United States History Historic

Taking Our Freedom for Granted Our country was founded on the idea of freedom: freedom from a king, freedom to believe in whatever one wants to believe in and freedom to openly express these beliefs with others. Through careful examination of what the authors during this period of history were expressing, I have found a greater respect for our freedoms. Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine are all familiar names to high school students in the United States. However, their principles are not familiar and I was shocked to learn that I had not previously read a majority of the works these men created to provide a foundation for our country’s belief system. Due to these works, I realize how much I have taken our freedom for granted. These men had radical ideas: the government can’t impose a religion on us, religion has nothing to do with the church and questioning one’s beliefs is vital to their faith. While learning where our country’s religious roots were first planted, I’ve also learned just how important it is to question and probe everything we’re told. Why do I go to church? Because I’m supposed to, because my parents do, because that’s the â€Å"rule† set by my religion. If I were to stop attending church, I would be a bad Christian. However, isn’t it true that if I attend church yet do not truly believe in what I’m doing, this is just as bad? Paine wrote, â€Å"When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every oth er crime† (644). I believe Paine is saying that to tell yourself that you do believe in attending church when you know deep inside you are having doubts and... ... would be found deeply embedded in freedom and equality. The British government’s hostile ways in forcing a religion upon the people can be seen as horrible and yet, it was the very thing that allowed our country to strive so purposefully towards the freedom to believe anything one wants. Certain situations that seem bad can also â€Å"†¦bring things and men to light, which might otherwise have lain forever undiscovered† (966), as Paine wrote. And without these discoveries, we would be a people bound to a leader and dependent on everything that is told to us. Instead, we have become a people of great diversity, in both culture and belief, appearance and demeanor, and we refuse to give up this freedom that our founding fathers established. For, as Paine wrote, â€Å"†¦he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death† (969).

David Hocking’s book The Nature of God in Plain Language Essay

It has to be said that the concept of trust has taken quite a hammering in society in the past twenty years.   During this time we have seen a host of previously considered â€Å"credible† people such as politicians, priests, childcare workers, teachers, babysitters and more exposed in the media as liars, cheats and criminals so is it any wonder that we might have trouble believing in an entity that has never actually been seen by anyone – someone like God for example.   David Hocking examines this issue of trust in relation to faith in his book The Nature of God in Plain Language.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   One of the key factors illustrated in Hocking’s book is the fact that the Bible clearly states that God made man â€Å"in his own image†, so therefore God should be viewed as we might view other people around us, or perhaps more specifically in the way we view ourselves.  Ã‚   Hocking makes it clear that God is not some form of â€Å"force† but that instead he can be viewed to be a person like us, and therefore if we want to learn more about God then we can learn about him through looking at ourselves.   Hocking writes, â€Å"He possesses life, self-consciousness, freedom, purpose, intelligence and emotion† (65). One of the problems that stems from this viewpoint is that many people walk around with a very low opinion of themselves so it might be difficult to understand that while God is not ‘better’ than us, and therefore be considered as some paragon of perfection, he is an image of the very â€Å"best† that we could be to ourselves, for ourselves and to others. Hocking reinforces the fact about being a â€Å"friend of God† and points to the example of Abraham in the Old Testament who is cited as being a person who did look upon God, and did consider God to be his friend. We are not capable of being friends with a force, or source of higher power, which is why it is important for non-believers to understand that God does have elements of humanity, which we as humans share.   But the distance that is often perceived between God and man does help perpetuate the elements of mistrust about God as a creator of life, God as a loving father and God as the keeper of all men, especially if our own experience with trusting other human individuals has left us so cynical or jaded about the good in mankind Hocking believes that our growing cynicism is why trust is such an important concept when discussing a relationship with God. We should be able to trust our friends, our partners, and our family and this same trust needs to be found in God if he is to provide a positive influence in our own lives. Hocking illustrates the common problem we have as trusting individual’s when he explains about a woman that had been abused and let down continually by the significant people in her life including her parents that placed her in an institution, to friends and significant others she met throughout her life.   If she had been let down by so many people in her life it would be virtually impossible for her to consider that an unseen and unknown friend like God could care for a person he had never physically met, at least in her eyes, and is apparently unknown to her. Hocking believes this lack of trust can be overcome through three main factors that should be indicators of a whether or not a person might be trustworthy.   These three elements, telling the truth, doing what is right and fair, and being reliable, should provide the standards we measure the trustworthy nature of our friends and family, and Hocking explains how these same three factors can influence the level of trust we might have in God. The Bible illustrates countless examples of where God has proven himself in terms of these three measures of trustworthiness.   Hocking describes God as being â€Å"morally pure† and therefore it would be impossible for God to lie, to be unfair or be someone that could not be depended on.   Hocking refers to the Old Testament that showed how the people of Israel came to trust in God as they walked through the desert, and the New Testament that supported the fact that God could be counted on as a faithful being and one who is always with us.   If these ideas can be understood by an individual then with the passage of time it would be possible for all of us to trust in the one being that will never let us down. Hocking’s viewpoint on God being an accessible, trustworthy and righteous being, who can have influence on an individual in modern life is not a new concept, but understanding the importance of understanding ourselves so that we may understand God more clearly is not a common idea.   Many religious based Churches strive to create a distance between God and man and use concepts such as man’s inclination to sin on earth and generally be considered unworthy in God’s eyes as a way to maintain that distance. The fact that this distance between God and ourselves only serves the purpose of the Church as a governing body, rather than the individual is often overlooked by many theologians, but Hocking, despite his own religious affiliations, seeks to strip away the negative perceptions that the Church has upheld about man and God throughout the ages and instead paves the way for a life that can be had by any individual who could understand that God can be a friend in every sense of the word. The one stumbling block to this level of understanding is the level of mistrust that is perpetuated in modern society between individuals and groups.   The central premise of Hocking’s book is that to know God we have to know ourselves; to understand God we have to understand ourselves as individuals and to trust in God, we need to trust in others and ourselves.   Stripped of religious hype and forewarnings of doom and gloom that is often manifested by Church groups worldwide, Hocking’s book shows us that it is possible to have a relationship with our Lord, and that this relationship can be based on trust, regardless of the actions of others in our lives. Works Cited Hocking, David.   The Nature of God in Plain Language, Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1984