Fast Food and the Community: Does It Matter What We Eat? Essay

Table of Contents Forward †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 3 1. Fast Food and Obesity †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦....†¦..†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦ 4 2. Fast Food in America: Low Wages †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦ 11 3. From Waist to Waste †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 20 4. The Benefits of the Fast Food Industry on the Individual †¦.. 28 5. Building the Relationship Between Fast Food and Community ........... 37 Works Cited †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. 40 Forward What are the implications of having fast food restaurants in a community? Information was collected about fast food restaurants’ contribution to communities through the lenses of obesity, wages, waste, benefits, and community relations. While there may be negatives surrounding the fast food industry, fast food restaurants do benefit the community in some ways. 1. Fast Food and Obesity America is the fattest country in the entire world and is getting fatter. Obesity is the second biggest killer next to deaths caused by smoking. In 1991, 1 in every 8 adults was obese; in 1999, 1 in every 5 adults was obese, which shows how America is becoming more obese all of the time. In 1991, only four states had obesity prevalence rates of 15 to 19% and no states had rates at or above 20%. On the other hand, in 2004, 7 states had 15 to 19% prevalence; an overwhelming number of 33 states had 20 to 24% prevalence, and 9 states had rates of more than 25% prevalence. The U.S. Surgeon General says that 61% of Americans are significantly overweight compared to in the 1990’s of 55% and in the 1970’s, where it was 46%. The question is, are these results a direct effect of the fast food industry? One in every four people visits fast food daily. With the average American eating 3 hamburgers and four orders of fries a week, there are several rea... ...y." www.bk.com. Burger King. 13 Apr. 2006 . "Do What Tastes Right-Wendys.Com." Wendy's. 12 Apr. 2 . Farmer, Kevin J. Personal interview. 17 Apr. 2006. "Global Diversity." Yum! Brands, Inc. 13 Apr. 2006 . Hernley, Rosella. Telephone interview. 17 Apr. 2006. Monfront, Jeff. Telephone interview. 17 Apr. 2006. "Official SUBWAY Restaurants' Web Site." Subway Restaurants. 12 Apr. 2006 . "Operating Guidelines." www.mcdonalds.com. McDonalds. 13 Apr. 2006 . "TacoBell.Com." Taco Bell. 12 Apr. 2006 . Tenwadle, Jonathan. Personal interview. 19 Apr. 2006. "Welcome to KFC." KFC. 12 Apr. 2006 . "Welcome to McDonald's." McDonalds. 12 Apr. 2006 .

4th Amendmant and Probable Cause

In the United States, the police must, whenever practicable, obtain advance judicial approval of searches and seizures through the appropriate warrant procedure. In most instances, failure to comply with the warrant requirement can only be excused by exigent circumstances. There should be circumstances sufficient to warrant a prudent man to believe that the person stopped had committed or was committing an offense. Intrusions upon constitutionally guaranteed rights must be based on more than unarticulated hunches, and simple good faith on part of the officer is not enough. The facts should prove reasonable inferences derived from unusual conduct. A person may assert violation of his Fourth Amendment rights in connection with search or seizure only if he can demonstrate a legitimate expectation of privacy in the area searched or items seized. To establish, for Fourth Amendment purposes, a legitimate expectation of privacy in area searched or items seized, defendants must demonstrate: (1) subjective expectation of privacy; and (2) that this expectation is one that society is prepared to recognize as objectively reasonable. Under Fourth Amendment, police are authorized to conduct a warrantless protective pat-down of individuals they encounter in the field so long as their concerns are justified by reasonable suspicion of possible danger. Under the Fourth Amendment, police may execute warrantless searches incident to a lawful arrest, as it is reasonable for authorities to search an arrestee for weapons that might threaten their safety, or for evidence which might be destroyed. The United States Supreme Court has explicitly determined that a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in an automobile belonging to another. Though the passenger does not have a standing to challenge the search of car that he does not own, he can still challenge the lawfulness of his own detention when the car is stopped at a drug interdiction checkpoint, and therefore, he can seek to suppress any evidence seized as fruit of his allegedly illegal detention. Even assuming that drug interdiction checkpoint was legal, such that the officers did not violate the passenger’s Fourth Amendment rights by stopping the vehicle in which he was riding, a passenger’s detention was held to be independent and separate from officers’ discovery of drugs during the search of the vehicle’s driver/owner consensual search of the vehicle. The stop and search of a moving automobile can be made without a warrant but, automobile or no automobile, there must be probable cause for the search. Probable cause to search exists when there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place. Standards of â€Å"reasonable suspicion† and â€Å"probable cause,† as used to evaluate constitutionality of investigative stops and searches, are not readily, or even usefully, reduced to a neat set of legal rules but rather are common sense, non- technical conceptions that deal with factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent persons, not legal technicians, act. Standards are fluid concepts that take their substantive content from particular contexts in which standards are being assessed. The United States Supreme Court held that brief, suspicion-less seizures at highway checkpoints for the purposes of combating drunk driving and intercepting illegal immigrants were constitutional. The Fourth Amendment requires that searches and seizures be reasonable. A search and seizure is ordinarily unreasonable in the absence of individualized suspicion of wrongdoing. When officers have reasonable suspicion that occupants of a vehicle are engaged in criminal activity, they may briefly stop the vehicle to investigate. Police may make an investigative stop of a vehicle when they have reasonable suspicion of an ongoing crime, whether it be a felony or misdemeanor, including drunk driving in jurisdictions where that is a criminal offense. Police may also make a stop when they have reasonable suspicion of a completed felony, though not of a mere completed misdemeanor. The court in various cases held that for purposes of determining whether an investigatory stop is justified by reasonable suspicion, the following instances may be taken in to account, as the traffic violation of failure to stay within lanes, a driver’s slowing down, stiffening of posture, and failure to acknowledge a sighted law enforcement officer might well be unremarkable in one instance, such as a busy San Francisco highway, while quite unusual in another, such as a remote portion of rural southeastern Arizona. But a brief veering out of a lane of travel on a windy day does not give probable cause to the police to stop the vehicle. In making reasonable-suspicion determinations, reviewing courts must look at the totality of the circumstances of each case to see whether the detaining officer has a particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing. â€Å"Totality of the circumstances† approach to making reasonable-suspicion determinations allows officers to draw on their own experience and specialized training to make inferences from and deductions about the cumulative information available to them that might well elude an untrained person. Although an officer’s reliance on a mere â€Å"hunch† is insufficient to justify an investigatory stop, the likelihood of criminal activity need not rise to the level required for probable cause, and it falls considerably short of satisfying a preponderance of the evidence standard. Although the concept of reasonable suspicion required to justify an investigatory stop is somewhat abstract, the United States Supreme Court has deliberately avoided reducing it to a neat set of legal rules. In determining whether individualized suspicion is required to support a stop of a motorist’s vehicle, the United States Supreme Court considered the nature of the interests threatened and their connection to the particular law enforcement practices at issue. The Court is particularly reluctant to recognize exceptions to the general rule of individualized suspicion where governmental authorities primarily pursue their general crime control ends. While subjective intentions on the part of police officers play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis, checkpoint stops may be relevant to the validity of Fourth Amendment intrusions undertaken pursuant to a general scheme without individualized suspicion. The United States Supreme Court determined that checkpoints set up for general crime prevention, including drug interdiction, do not pass constitutional muster under the Fourth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court noted that checkpoint cases only limited exceptions to the general rule that a seizure must be accompanied by some measure of individualized suspicion. An Anatomy of a Criminal Trial Most criminal trials follow a uniform set of procedures. The many rituals associated with modern trials have developed over centuries. America’s common law heritage makes it possible for all states and the federal government to follow a largely uniform set of procedures. Assuming that the trial is carried out to completion, those procedures are as follows: Decision on judge or jury. The defense decides whether it wants the case tried by a judge or a jury (the prosecution can’t require a jury trial). Jury selection. If the trial will be held before a jury, the defense and prosecution select the jury through a question and answer process called â€Å"voir dire. † In federal courts and many state courts, the judge carries out this process using questions suggested by the attorneys as well as questions that the judge comes up with on his or her own. Evidence issues. The defense and prosecution request the court, in advance of trial, to admit or exclude certain evidence. These requests are called motions â€Å"in limine. † Opening statements. The prosecution and then the defense make opening statements to the judge or jury. These statements provide an outline of the case that each side expects to prove. Because neither side wants to look foolish to the jury, the attorneys are careful to promise only what they think they can deliver. In some cases the defense attorney reserves opening argument until the beginning of the defense case. Prosecution case-in-chief. The prosecution presents its main case through direct examination of prosecution witnesses by the prosecutor. Cross-examination. The defense may cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. Redirect. The prosecution may re-examine its witnesses. Prosecution rests. The prosecution finishes presenting its case. Motion to dismiss (optional). The defense may move to dismiss the charges if it thinks that the prosecution has failed to produce enough evidence — even if the jury believes it — to support a guilty verdict. Denial of motion to dismiss. Almost always, the judge denies the defense motion to dismiss. Defense case-in-chief. The defense presents its main case through direct examination of defense witnesses. Cross-examination. The prosecutor cross-examines the defense witnesses. Redirect. The defense re-examines the defense witnesses. Defense rests. The defense finishes presenting its case. Prosecution rebuttal. The prosecutor offers evidence to refute the defense case. Settling on jury instructions. The prosecution and defense get together with the judge and craft a final set of instructions that the judge will give the jury. Prosecution closing argument. The prosecution makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the prosecution sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a guilty verdict. Defense closing argument. The defense makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the defense sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a not guilty verdict — or at least a guilty verdict on a lesser charge. Prosecution rebuttal. The prosecution has the last word, if it chooses to do so, and again argues that the jury has credible evidence that supports a finding of guilty. Jury instructions. The judge instructs the jury about what law to apply to the case and how to carry out its duties. (Some judges â€Å"preinstruct† juries, reciting instructions before closing argument or even at the outset of trial. ) Jury deliberations. The jury deliberates and tries to reach a verdict. Most states require unanimous agreement, but Oregon and Louisiana allow convictions with only 10 of 12 votes. Post-trial motions. If the jury produces a guilty verdict, the defense often makes post-trial motions requesting the judge to override the jury and either grant a new trial or acquit the defendant. Denial of post-trial motions. Almost always, the judge denies the defense post-trial motions. Sentencing. Assuming a conviction (a verdict of â€Å"guilty†), the judge either sentences the defendant on the spot or sets sentencing for another day. To read and printout a copy of the Form please link below. Checklist: Documents Your Attorney Will Need Be Sociable, Share! Twitter Facebook email StumbleUpon Delicious Google Reader LinkedIn BlinkList Digg Google Bookmarks Myspace Post to Twitter

Aristotle, A World-Renowned Greek Philosopher Once Noted

Aristotle, a world-renowned Greek philosopher once noted a tragedy is â€Å"the imitation of an action that is serious and also, as having magnitude, complete in itself...in a dramatic, not in a narrative form; with incidents arousing pity and fear, wherewith to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions (Bywater, 1920, p. 35).† These words encapsulate the perception that tragedy is a mimicry surrounded by an underlying purpose through a direct action that arouses the audience’s emotions of fear and relief by witnessing a dreadful or gripping change that happens to the protagonist. Between Greek and Elizabethan times, characters were developed to portray tragic people, who possessed flaws that created drastic consequences for them in the†¦show more content†¦Cordelia chose to be truthful with her father instead of lying like her sisters, which caused her to be disowned, thus establishing the central conflict to arise within the kingdom. In relation, Jason rid ded Medea as a wife and began an affair with the Princess of Corinth â€Å"to make provision for you [Medea] and the children (Euripides, 1993, p.15)†. Even though he thought this would benefit Medea and their children, his rash judgment proved similar to Cordelia’s situation, as this produced problems between Medea and Jason, which later is shown to be detrimental to Jason. Although their flaws caused tragedy to strike, Cordelia and Jason remained consistent in their behaviors throughout the play and never changed who they truly were. Consistency of a character’s attributes and traits during a play tends to create a more believable character and storyline. According to Poetics, a written theory by Aristotle, it states that the second most important element in a tragedy is a character that never does or says anything that will be seen as â€Å"acting out of character† (cited in Lonardo, 2012). When a character does something that is against their better judgment, it makes it difficult for the audience to accept that what they are doing is the right course of action. Furthermore, Aristotle goes on to specify that for a character to be considered aShow MoreRelatedAlexander The Great : The Characters Of Alexander The Great1222 Words   |  5 PagesAlexander, and several time he himself made mistakes when in an intense emotional episode. Aristotle, a famous philosopher who tutored Alexander gave him a sense of cultural respect. Alexander was taught reverence for important artistic sites, which is evi dent in his conquest, when he does in fact give respect to said sites. The main figures of Alexander the Great’s life, Philip II, Olympias, and Aristotle all shaped individual elements of Alexander’s personality, such as his courage, theatricalityRead MoreAnalysis Of John Locke s The Of The Golden Era Essay1393 Words   |  6 PagesDuring the course of history there has been brilliant men who have accomplished amazing feats that help cement their names for centuries. Aristotle was a man who opened the gate to the world of science. Marco Aurelius was a man with all the traits of a phenomenal thinker and leader, and so he is regarded as the Emperor of the â€Å"Golden Era†. Leonardo da Vinci opened the door to the Renaissance and William Shakespeare treated us to the best writings and plays in the English language. Likewise, JohnRead MoreThe Impact of Christianity on Western Civilization4850 Words   |  20 Pagesartists and composers were heavily influenced by its writings. Paul Maier, in writing the forward to the book How Christianity Changed the World by Alvin J. Schmidt, says this about the profound impact Christianity has had on the development of Western Civilization: â€Å"No other religion, philosophy, teaching, nation, movement—whatever—has so changed the world for the better as Christianity has done. Its shortcomings, clearly conceded by this author, are nevertheless heavily outweighed by its benefitsRead MoreMuslim Spain (711-1492)8971 Words   |  36 Pagesculture reached a high point in the Mediterranean Middle Ages. However, larger forces in conquest of land and power brought about puritanical judgments, absolutism and religious extremism. The conflict they triggered extinguished the shared learning that once flourished in this enlightened land. ...I will forgive all the shortcomings and remove the evil deeds of those who were expelled from their homes or were persecuted for My sake and who fought for My cause and were slain. I shall admit them intoRead MoreCommon Laboratory Operations5997 Words   |  24 PagesList of the entire famous scientist Alessandro Volta(1745-1827) An Italian Physicist who was a pioneer in the development of electricity. He created the first electric battery in 1800. This battery gave the world its first continuous, reliable source of electric current, and led to all important discoveries of the use of electricity. The unit of measuring electromotive force (emf), Volt(v) is named after him. He also proposed the law that the air expands at a constant rate with increasing temperatureRead MoreFrancis Bacon15624 Words   |  63 Pagesreaon, William Blake, a spiritual poet says about his essays:   â€Å"Good advice for Satan’s Kingdom.† Blake considers any utilitarian advice contrary to God’s ways, but Bacon does not bother for that. He considers this world more important and striving after the success in this world is equally important. Bacon discusses man as he â€Å"appears† and not as he â€Å"ought to appear†.   In his essay â€Å"Of Great Places† Bacon certainly shows a high morality when he condemns or at least dislikes the practice of ‘wrongs’Read MoreImpact of Science on Society38427 Words   |  154 PagesEnglish Schools in Bologna and Rome. He made his television debut in 1965 as a reporter for Granada Television’s Rome Bureau. Burke’s impressive following in the British Isles dates back t o 1966, when he joined the BBC’s weekly science show, Tomorrow’s World. As the chief BBC correspondent for all Apollo space flights, Burke won critical acclaim for his interpretation of the US space program to an audience of over 12 million people. During this time he developed and presented a variety of documentariesRead MoreImpact of Science on Society38421 Words   |  154 PagesEnglish Schools in Bologna and Rome. He made his television debut in 1965 as a reporter for Granada Television’s Rome Bureau. Burke’s impressive following in the British Isles dates back t o 1966, when he joined the BBC’s weekly science show, Tomorrow’s World. As the chief BBC correspondent for all Apollo space flights, Burke won critical acclaim for his interpretation of the US space program to an audience of over 12 million people. During this time he developed and presented a variety of documentaries