High School Uniform Polices Essay -- Teaching Public Schools

High School Uniform Polices Hello, I am here today to tell you about a problem that I see in our high schools. This problem is that there is not a uniform policy in all of schools. There are many arguments for and against having a uniform policy in the school systems. Some would argue that having a uniform would limit kids from their self-expression and individuality. While others believe that this is a good idea so that there is not any â€Å"labels† in our schools. By this I mean that poor and rich kids will not be noticed by what they wear. No matter what the outcome in this matter there will always be people that get upset about the outcome. I am here to give you my reason for supporting the idea that all high schools should have a uniform policy. Today the way we dress can non-knowingly segregate people into groups, especially in people’s younger years of middle and high school. Also the way you dress can represent different gangs. I am not saying that if there were a uniform policy in all o f our schools that this would completely stop these problems but it would help to reduce them. Today in our schools people’s dress represent a lot more than just self-expression. It is a representation of social classes and groups. Most of the time a person can pick out the poor people and the rich as well just by the clothes that they wear. If it is that easy to look at someone and know something about them just from the clothes that they wear then this automatically segregates ...

Cases on Contract Essay

The defendant made the highest bid for the plaintiff’s goods at an auction sale, but he withdrew his bid before the fall of the auctioneer’s hammer. It was held that the defendant was not bound to purchase the goods. His bid amounted to an offer which he was entitled to withdraw at any time before the auctioneer signified acceptance by knocking down the hammer. Note: The common law rule laid down in this case has now been codified in s57(2) Sale of Goods Act 1979. Fisher v Bell (1960) A shopkeeper displayed a flick knife with a price tag in the window. The Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 made it an offence to ‘offer for sale’ a ‘flick knife’. The shopkeeper was prosecuted in the magistrates’ court but the Justices declined to convict on the basis that the knife had not, in law, been ‘offered for sale’. This decision was upheld by the Queen’s Bench Divisional Court. Lord Parker CJ stated: â€Å"It is perfectly clear that according to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merely an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for sale the acceptance of which constitutes a contract.† PSGB v Boots (1953) The defendants’ shop was adapted to the â€Å"self-service† system. The question for the Court of Appeal was whether the sales of certain drugs were effected by or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist. The question was answered in the affirmative. Somervell LJ stated that â€Å"in the case of an ordinary shop, although goods are displayed and it is intended that customers should go and choose what they want, the contract is not completed until, the customer having indicated the articles which he needs, the shopkeeper, or someone on his behalf, accepts that offer. Then the contract is completed.† Partridge v Crittenden (1968) It was an offence to offer for sale certain wild birds. The defendant had advertised in a periodical ‘Quality Bramblefinch cocks, Bramblefinch hens, 25s each’. His conviction was quashed by the High Court. Lord Parker CJ stated that when one is dealing with advertisements and circulars, unless they indeed come from manufacturers, there is business sense in their being construed as invitations to treat and not offers for sale. In a very different context Lord Herschell in Grainger v Gough (Surveyor of Taxes) [1896] AC 325, said this in dealing with a price list: â€Å"The transmission of such a price list does not amount to an offer to supply an unlimited quantity of the wine described at the price named, so that as soon as an order is given there is a binding contract to supply that quantity. If it were so, the merchant might find himself involved in any number of contractual obligations to supply wine of a particular description which he would be quite unable to carry out, his stock of wine of that description being necessarily limited.† Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893) An advert was placed for ‘smoke balls’ to prevent influenza. The advert offered to pay  £100 if anyone contracted influenza after using the ball. The company deposited  £1,000 with the Alliance Bank to show their sincerity in the matter. The plaintiff bought one of the balls but contracted influenza. It was held that she was entitled to recover the  £100. The Court of Appeal held that: (a) the deposit of money showed an intention to be bound, therefore the advert was an offer; (b) it was possible to make an offer to the world at large, which is accepted by anyone who buys a smokeball; (c) the offer of protection would cover the period of use; and (d) the buying and using of the smokeball amounted to acceptance. Harvey v Facey (1893) The plaintiffs sent a telegram to the defendant, â€Å"Will you sell Bumper Hall Pen? Telegraph lowest cash price†. The defendants reply was â€Å"Lowest price  £900†. The plaintiffs telegraphed â€Å"We agree to buy †¦ for  £900 asked by you†. It was held by the Privy Council that the defendants telegram was not an offer but simply an indication of the minimum price the defendants would want, if they decided to sell. The plaintiffs second telegram could not be an acceptance. Gibson v MCC (1979) The council sent to tenants details of a scheme for the sale of council houses. The plaintiff immediately replied, paying the  £3 administration fee. The council replied: â€Å"The corporation may be prepared to sell the house to you at the purchase price of  £2,725 less 20 per cent.  £2,180 (freehold).† The letter gave details about a mortgage and went on â€Å"This letter should not be regarded as a firm offer of a mortgage. If you would like to make a formal application to buy your council house, please complete the enclosed application form and return it to me as soon as possible.† G filled in and returned the form. Labour took control of the council from the Conservatives and instructed their officers not to sell council houses unless they were legally bound to do so. The council declined to sell to G. In the House of Lords, Lord Diplock stated that words italicised seem to make it quite impossible to construe this letter as a contractual offer capable of being converted into a legally enforceable open contract for the sale of land by G’s written acceptance of it. It was a letter setting out the financial terms on which it may be the council would be prepared to consider a sale and purchase in due course. Harvela v Royal Trust (1985) Royal Trust invited offers by sealed tender for shares in a company and undertook to accept the highest offer. Harvela bid $2,175,000 and Sir Leonard Outerbridge bid $2,100,000 or $100,000 in excess of any other offer. Royal Trust accepted Sir Leonard’s offer. The trial judge gave judgment for Harvela. In the House of Lords, Lord Templeman stated: â€Å"To constitute a fixed bidding sale all that was necessary was that the vendors should invite confidential offers and should undertake to accept the highest offer. Such was the form of the invitation. It follows that the invitation upon its true construction created a fixed bidding sale and that Sir Leonard was not entitled to submit and the vendors were not entitled to accept a referential bid.† Blackpool Aero Club v Blackpool Borough Council (1990) BBC invited tenders to operate an airport, to be submitted by noon on a fixed date. The plaintiffs tender was delivered by hand and put in the Town Hall letter box at 11am. However, the tender was recorded as having been received late and was not considered. The club sued for breach of an alleged warranty that a tender received by the deadline would be considered. The judge awarded damages for breach of contract and negligence. The council’s appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. ACCEPTANCE Brogden v MRC (1877) B supplied coal to MRC for many years without an agreement. MRC sent a draft agreement to B who filled in the name of an arbitrator, signed it and returned it to MRC’s agent who put it in his desk. Coal was ordered and supplied in accordance with the agreement but after a dispute arose B said there was no binding agreement. It was held that B’s returning of the amended document was not an acceptance but a counter-offer which could be regarded as accepted either when MRC ordered coal or when B actually supplied. By their conduct the parties had indicated their approval of the agreement.

Outline and Evaluate the Psychological Research Into the Link Between Stress and the Immune System Essay

The main function of the immune system is to protect the body from infectious agents such as viruses and other toxins. The immune system can fail us in two ways-either by, letting infections enter the body, or being over-active, so that it is the immune system itself, rather than an infectious agent that causes illness. Most studies of the relationship between stress and the immune system have focussed on acute stressors and have found a decrease in immune cell function. One study which relates to stress and the immune system was Cohan (1993). Cohen investigated the role of general life stress on vulnerability to the common cold virus. Three hundred and ninety-four participants completed questionnaires on the number of stressful life events they had experienced in the previous year. They also rated their degree of stress and their level of negative emotions such as depression. See more: argument essay format The three scores were combined into what Cohen called a stress index. The participants were then exposed to the common cold virus, leading to 82% becoming infected with the virus. . The findings were that the chance of developing a cold was significantly linked with stress index scores. A strength of this study was that it did measure health outcomes, showing a relationship between life stress and illness. This can be compared with studies that use measures of immune function rather than illness outcomes. Also, this was an indirect study in the sense that there were no direct measures of immune function. However it is supported by Evans and Edgington (1991) who found that the probability of developing a cold was significantly correlated with negative events in the preceding days. However there are many limitations. During the study participants should be constantly monitored to check for any reactions to the viral challenge which had affected their health and the scientific value of the study should be balanced against any psychological or physical distress to participants. Another study which looks at the link between stress and the immune system was a study carried out by Brady in 1958. He linked high levels of stress to increased hormone production and the development of ulcers. In an early study he placed monkeys in â€Å"restraining chairs† and conditioned them to press a lever. They were given shocks every 20 seconds unless the lever was pressed in the same time period. This investigation came to an abrupt halt when many of the monkeys suddenly died. After 23 days of 6 hours on, 6 hours off schedule the executive monkey died due to a perforated ulcer. He tried various routines, such as 18 hours on and 6 hours off, or 30 minutes on, 30 minutes off. However, no monkeys died from ulcers. He then tested the stomachs of executive monkeys on a 6 hour on, 6 hour off schedule, and found that stomach acidity was greatest during the rest period. Brady concluded that it was clearly stress, not the shocks that created the ulcers. One criticism made of Brady’s study in general was that the monkeys were not randomly selected, the â€Å"executive† was chosen because it was faster at learning an avoidance response. This may of course have parallels with the human world. Also, the fact that the study was carried out on monkeys means that the results cannot be generalised for humans. Also another limitation was that a more serious problem was raised in the research by Marshall et al (1985). They found strong evidence of another cause of stomach ulcers, a bacterium called Helicobacter pylori not stress related.