To Design Secure, Scalable and Responsive Database Security Plan and Research Paper

To Design Secure, Scalable and Responsive Database Security Plan and Requirements Definition Document for a Medical Records SAN - Research Paper Example tructure. However these corporate structures are presently under a great deal of risks. These risks include critical security and privacy attacks. In this scenario there is a dire need for the application of enhanced security and privacy solutions that ensure a scalable and responsive Medical Records SAN (Storage Area Network). In fact application of such security based solutions demands extensive security management endeavor. With the effective security management we can gain a better business competitive edge in the marketplace. This report is based on the security plan development and implementation for a Medical Records SAN (Storage Area Network). Part 1: Project Identification and Business Environment Major responsibilities for database security management For the development of an information security plan we generally require a comprehensive hierarchy of security management staff. In this scenario the corporate Chief Security Manager will be in-charge of this responsive, secur e and scalable database security plan. Then we will hire an Assistant Security Manager who will perform the responsibilities of managing operative measures and complex corporate security issues. Operational and  incident management  procedures In case of any security violation or threat the corporate security plan will be operational. However we will also maintain the facility of constantly database back-ups. In this way we can easily manage the complex situation through various security based measures to stop or manage such security threats. Personnel and procedures for daily administration In case if we want regular security and operational management for the corporate we will have to establish and maintain a suitable safety handling and managerial arrangement. This may involve a reporting mechanism on daily basis under the supervision of Assistant Security Manager who will compile the weekly security report for Chief Security Manager. Hence the responsible authority can take the necessary action for the overall security management and handling. Part 2: Architecture and Operating System Considerations Architecture of System The corporate information security policy will govern the overall corporate security management operations. Given below is a comprehensive architecture of the new security management arrangement for SAN: Figure 1: Architecture of security policy Source: http://itil.osiatis.es/ITIL_course/it_service_management/security_management/introduction_and_objectives_security_management/introduction_and_objectives_security_management.php The above given diagram shows a complete and clear overview of our desired responsive database security

What is Love Essay Example for Free

What is Love Essay What is Love? Does anyone really know the meaning of the word? Does it have a different meaning to different people? In Kipnis’s essay â€Å"Love Labors†, Laura Kipnis touches on many different aspects of love. This is a touchy subject simply because love brings out many different opinions and beliefs. Kipnis argues over the fact that in order to have a good relationship and love someone people have to be able to meet certain requirements, which are mutuality, communication, and advanced intimacy. Love is a complicated topic, in my opinion there are two types of love. The first type is when people can tell their friends or their family members that they love them. This type of love is the kind of love where everybody knows their supper close with one another, and will do anything for each another. The second type of love is the love that one person has between another human being, this special someone could be that other human beings soul mate. This type of love is where one person can tell their significant partner anything they want in the world, because they know that they can trust them to be straight up with them. When I was reading her essay I was always finding myself being confused when reading about how she felt about things for example one of her bigger topics adultery. I was really confused when she stated â€Å"Yes, adulterers: playing around, breaking vows, causing havoc. Or†¦ maybe not just playing around? † (Kipnis 399) I really had no idea what the point is that she is trying to get across when talking about adultery. It was sentences like this one that made her essay really confusing and hard to understand. On the other hand my interpretation of what I read was that this essay is about loves meaning, the different aspects of love and how you have to work to keep love alive. In one of Kipnis’s other essays â€Å"Against Love† Kipnis suggests, â€Å"Love is, as we know, a mysterious and controlling force. It has vast power over our thoughts and life decisions. It demands our loyalty, and we, in return freely comply† (Nytimes. com). I think this is the best way to explain love. When there is someone that you really care for, you do and say things that you never imagine yourself doing. I think this is the main purpose of love and what everyone should feel. Love is not something you just stumble upon. It is something that grows on you with time. I believe that if you love someone your willing to go out of your way and do extraordinary things for this person. I do not believe it would be a random person in front of you at the supermarket that you will do those types of things for, because you need to have a deep feeling and connection to this person. In this essay, something else Kipnis said stood out to me. â€Å"But passion must not be allowed to die! † (nytimes. com). I believe that if there is passion, you should never let it die. Passion is a strong, uncontrollable emotion that you have for another person. It is not something that you can stop or pretend to share with someone. Love can and will make you feel as if you are nothing without the other half. The cultural artifact that I chose to use for this analysis is No Strings Attached directed by Ivan Reitman. The movie is based off of two characters one that is portrayed by Ashton Kutcher and Natalie Portman plays the other character. The movie is about a guy and a girl who are trying to be friends with benefits. They are pretty much friends that use each other for sex and they made a pact to not fall in love. However, by the end of the movie they both realize that they do truly love each other. â€Å"We don’t pick who we fall in love with and it never happens like it should. † (Alvin, No strings attached) You can’t just force yourself to fall in love with somebody it just kind of happens. The doctor that she dated through out the movie seemed like the perfect guy for her, but she wasn’t truly in love with him. Adam never gave up on her and you see that at the end of the movie. No matter how you go about being friends with benefits at some point some is going to catch feelings for the other or potentially fall in love with them. With that being said one of the two people participating in this act is going to end up getting hurt. In the movie No Strings attached Adams falls in love with Emma when she breaks his heart by telling him she can’t do this anymore. Both characters had a different part in the movie, No Strings Attached. In Kipnis’s essay Love Labors she talks about, â€Å"how domestic life has become such a chore that staying at the office is more relaxing†. (Kipnis 395) Natalie Portman’s character is the uptight person in their so-called relationship she is more worried about her work than she is worried about having a relationship. She finds her work more relaxing than actually having to put work in to something else. She is also in control over their whole friends with benefits relationship. On the other hand Ashton Kutchers character plays the role of being more easy-going and the ladies man. Most times when adultery comes up we think that its no big deal that were just messing around or that were just playing around with one another, when in all reality adultery is a lot more serious than we really think it is. In todays society we call it friends with benefits, in the movie no strings attached they plan to be friends with benefits not thinking their going to catch feelings for one another due to the fact that we think were just playing around with one another even though we don’t realized the fact that some point the relationship will start to get serious, and we wont just be playing around. When two people want to have a relationship where it deals with them only messing around and thinking that by playing around they wont think that their relationship will start to get serious and be something more than just sleeping with each other. Society today shows us that people who want to have a relationship where they are just messing around with each other and don’t have any clue that one day things will start to get serious between both people, because they are too busy having fun and just messing around with one another and don’t realize that they will start to build feelings for one another while they continue to have a friends with benefits relationship. A few terms that Kipnis would use in her analysis would have to be dedication, appreciation, and lust. In my mind, Kipnis would think that Adam and Emma are meant to be together, that Emma had to move on and find a different guy, for Emma to really realize how she felt about Adam and how he is the right guy for her. Kipnis would say that to build a strong relationship with Adam, Emma would need to realize what he really meant to her. When Emma dates the doctor it helps her realize that Adam is the one. When Kipnis talks about â€Å"the millions of images of love struck couples looming over us from movie screens, televisions, billboards, magazines, incessantly strong-aiming us onboard the love train. † (Kipnis 402) I feel as though love is promising us that one day we will find that one special someone that we will spend the rest of our lives with, but before we can spend the rest of our lives with that special someone we first have to go through a struggle of loss. We will loose that special someone only for a moment and in that moment we will have to find the strength to over come the adversity through out the struggle we inherit. This will show us a path that we will have to take in order to be with the one we love the most, but there will be many or maybe even just one struggle along the way that we will have to over come. This is how love will â€Å"Strong-arm us† (Kipnis 402) it will make us stronger as people and as couples. In my mind some of the dangers of resisting love are that mostly because people don’t want to get hurt, or they don’t want to marry someone and then have their marriage end in divorce. So many people are worried about divorcing their significant other right after they get married, and to me that’s why I think people try and resist love. In my mind the love that this society is trying to help create is a type of love that is more than just seeing two people get married, then having kids and watching their kids grow up and begin to have families of their own.

Cannabis Use in Canada: Legislation and the Future

Cannabis Use in Canada: Legislation and the Future Crime refers to behaviors that are a violation of codified law. However, the exact definition of crime is complex and ever-changing, as it depends on social, political and economic factors. For example, what may be considered a crime one day, may be seen as legal the next (Law Commission, 2004). This concept is exemplified by the evolution of laws regarding the possession of cannabis that has occurred throughout the years in Canada. Ever since cannabis and its derivatives have been introduced in Canada years ago, government prohibition of it has been the subject of an ongoing debate of whether it should be legalized or not. Proponents of cannabis use argue that there are numerous medical benefits and that the drug is no more harmful than tobacco or alcohol (CAMH, 2014). Therefore, prohibiting cannabis intrudes on an individuals fundamental freedoms. On the other hand, opponents argue that cannabis is too dangerous; its legalization would increase the chances of the drug falling into the hands of children and that cannabis use often progresses to the use of more dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine (Evans, 2013). This paper analyzes the current approach to possession of cannabis in Canada, paying close attention to relevant laws and legal cases. This paper will further argue that from a variety of approaches to deal with cannabis, legalization is the most useful and effective method. Background Cannabis, primarily derived from the female plant, Cannabis sativa, is believed to have evolved on the steppes of Central Asia. The history of cannabis use goes back as far as 12,000 years, which places the plant among humanitys oldest cultivated crops (CAMH, 2014). The first record of the drugs medicinal use dates to 4000 B.C. where it was used as an anesthetic during surgery. From the 17th to the mid 20th century, standardized cannabis found their way into British and US pharmacopoeias and was widely used in western medicine, often considered a household drug used for treating various kinds of ailment ranging from headaches and toothaches to menstrual cramps (MacQueen, 2013). Cannabis eventually fell out of use in western medicine, and was banned in most countries as part of national and international drug control legislation that was originally designed to control traffic in opiates but was extended to include a broad range of other psychoactive agents. However, in the 1970s, cann abis use rose dramatically and became a part of the youth culture due to its mood and perception altering properties, which made it a recreational drug of choice for many individuals (Blaszczak-Boxe, 2014). Throughout its long history, parts of the cannabis plant have been smoked, chewed, eaten, and even brewed for its effects on the human biochemistry. Marijuana- also called weed, pot, grass, reefer, and a vast number of other slang terms- comes primarily from the flower part of the cannabis plant and is one of the most abused drugs in the world (Evans, 2013). There are hundreds of compounds in marijuana, but the chemical responsible for the drugs psychoactive effects is tetrahydrocannbinol, or THC. Marijuana affects two main parts of the human body, the central nervous system and the cardiovascular system (CAMH, 2014). The central nervous system, which mainly controls thoughts and registers sensations throughout the body, can be impacted through varying doses of marijuana. For example, a low dose of marijuana results in a sense of well being and drowsiness/relaxation (Ponto et al., 2004). As the dose increases, other effects tend to come in, usually altered sense of time and sensory a wareness. At much higher to extreme doses, paranoia, hallucinations, panic attacks and delusions have been reported to occur. The cardiovascular system can be affected by cannabis use through increased heart rate and dilation of eye blood vessels. There can also be difficulties in body movement and coordination as the dosage of cannabis increases (Ponto et al., 2004). As with some other psychoactive drugs, the use of cannabis is not benign. Research has found both benefits and harms associated with cannabis use. Cannabis has therapeutic qualities and many people consume it for its psychoactive effects (Room et al., 2010). A number of the potentially useful effects have been well studied and confirmed scientifically in both experimental animals and human volunteers and patients. One of these is the moderately good analgesic action, principally against chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain (Evans, 2013). Furthermore, only about ten percent of individuals who consume the drug become dependent, a rate that is extremely low in comparison to other illicit and legal drugs. In fact, tobacco, a drug that is considered legal in Canada, has a dependency rate of 32% (Health Canada, 2015). The potential for harm exists, particularly for people who consume it frequently or begin using in adolescence. These harms include impairment of learning, memory, alertness, reaction speed and judgment (Babor et al., 2010). Those who are dependent on cannabis have been documented to face both cardiovascular and respiratory issues such as chronic bronchitis. In addition, research suggests that high levels of cannabis use can be linked to lung and prostate cancer (Room et al., 2010). Despite the negative effects of high levels of cannabis use, it is crucial to acknowledge the fact that most individuals do not become dependent on the drug. Rather, most will experiment with cannabis use only a few times in their life (Room et al., 2010). Canada has one of the highest rates of cannabis use in the world. Despite the existence of serious criminal penalties for possessing, producing, and selling cannabis, the 2013 Canadian Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey found that 40% of Canadians have used cannabis in their lifetime and about 10% report having used it in the past year (Health Canada, 2015). Additionally, the survey indicates that Canadian youth aged 15 to 19 are more likely to consume cannabis than adult Canadians. In fact, Canadian adolescents have among the highest rates of cannabis use compared to their peers in other developed countries (UNICEF Office of Research, 2013). According to the 2012 Canadian Community Health survey, 22.4% of youth aged 15 to19 reported past-year use of cannabis and in total, youth use cannabis at a rate 2.5 times higher than adults aged 25 and older (Statistics Canada, 2015). In view of these statistics, it is unsurprising that cannabis is widely available throughout Canada and that a w ell-established cannabis market exists in Canada. Laws surrounding the possession of Cannabis in Canada In Canada, cannabis use became illegal in 1923 after the Act to Prohibit the Improper Use of Opium and other Drugs added cannabis to the list of illicit substances. Cannabis then became an illegal substance under the same category of harder drugs such as cocaine and heroin, despite lack of scientific or criminal correlations to suggest such categorization (CAMH, 2014). An increase in illicit drug use in the 1960s and 1970s was met by greatly increased criminalization and the associated individual and social costs. The strain on the courts, and the rising numbers of otherwise law-abiding youth being sentenced for recreational use of cannabis created pressures for the liberalization of Canadas drug laws. As a result, the Commission of Inquiry in the Non-Medical Use of Drugs in 1972 (commonly referred to as the Le Dain Commission) was formed to address the growing concern about drug use and appropriate responses. The Le Dain Commission concluded that drug prohibition, specifically canna bis use, results in high costs but relatively little benefit. The Le Dain Commission proposed that all criminal penalties associated with cannabis be removed, along with the development of less coercive and costly alternatives to punitive punishments, but was immediately rejected by the government at the time (Broughton, 2014). By the mid-1980s there was growing acknowledgement of the limitations of law enforcement in reducing the demand for drugs as the Canadian police forces were pursuing more cannabis arrests than ever before (Hathaway and Erickson 2003). As a result, in 1987, the Canadian federal government announced a harm reduction model approach to drug use to address substance use with both supply and demand reduction strategies. This model views drug use, particularly cannabis use, as an undeniable fact in society and seeks to reduce the harms caused by it rather than advocating abstinence (Hathaway and Erickson 2003). Despite this model, Canadas approach to cannabis was still largely a model of criminal prohibition. For example, Dian Riley of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy argues that this model is an ineffective and inappropriate drug policy that causes more harm than the drug itself (Broughton, 2014, p.4). In fact, since the first three years after the implementation of the program, the proportion of drug offenders in Canadas prison rose from 9 percent to 14 percent (Hathaway and Erickson 2003). The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act In 1997, there was the introduction of a new drug law that was meant to address some of the problems of past law and to adapt some of the positive experiences of other countries around the globe. The new law, Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (1996), is Canadas federal drug control statute and establishes eight Schedules of controlled substances and two Classes of precursors. This act outlines penalties for possession, trafficking and production of the substances established as illegal, including cannabis (MacQueen, 2013). Under this act, cannabis and its derivatives are considered as schedule II drugs and possession of it is illegal (Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, 1996). However, due to R. v. Parker (2001), the Supreme Court of Canada declared that section 4 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, which deals with the prohibition against possession of marijuana, was too broad insofar as it failed to create an exception for medical marijuana use. As such, in 2001 Health C anada issued a set of regulations giving individuals access to marijuana for medical purposes. The Medical Marihuana Access Regulations (2001), which went into effect in 2002, outlined two categories of individuals who may legally access marijuana prescribed by their doctor. These two categories mainly deal with individuals suffering from severe pain as a result of medical conditions. Individuals who have a medical condition described in category 1 or who are approved under category 2 can legally obtain medicinal marijuana distributed by the company CannaMed or can grow their own for personal consumption (Broughton, 2014). Thus, it is possible to have legal access to marijuana for medical purposes in Canada while recreational use of marijuana is still a criminal act. Despite the tough penalties in place, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (1996)has been criticized for criminalizing drug users and its failure to reduce drug availability while at the same time the financial and human costs of criminating cannabis continue to rise. Additionally, analyses of current policy practices demonstrate a failure to achieve the set out goals of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (1996)in reducing the consumption of cannabis (Broughton, 2014). Instead, criminalization has created further social issues. For example, an increase in arrests under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (1996) has not led to a decrease in the use of marijuana, with around 60,000 Canadian arrested for simple possession every year. On the contrary, the number of distributors and consumers has only increased in recent years (Room et al., 2010, p.60). The experiences within Canadian courts also demonstrate the inefficiency of the current approach to cannabis. For example, th e case of R. v. Malmo-Levine (2003) deals with the possession of marijuana. Malmo-Levine was charged with possession and trafficking of marijuana. He argued that the criminalization and punishment of possession of marijuana goes against his rights as stated in section 7 in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms declares that everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice (Canadian Charter, 1982, s 7). Malmo-Lavine argued that, by attaching a criminal penalty of imprisonment for simple possession of marijuana the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (1996)deprived him of liberty in a manner that is not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Malmo-Lavine suggested that it is a principle of fundamental justice that the criminal law can only prohibit activities that cause some sort of harm, and the possession of marijuana does not constitute as harm to others(R. v. Malmo-Levine, 2003). Justice Arbour, in the dissenting opinion, stated that the criminalization of cannabis punishes those who pose little risk to society and limits their Charter rights. Nevertheless, the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada did not agree with Justice Arbours argument and instead ruled that the law against the recreational use of marijuana did not violate the Charter in any of the ways suggested by Malmo-Lavine (R. v. Malmo-Levine, 2003). The cases of Readhead (2008) and Evers (2011), further exemplifies how the approaches outlined in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (1996) leads to unnecessary arrests and unfair targeting of individuals. In R. v. Readhead (2008), the accused was charged with the possession of marijuana and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of two and one half years. Readhead argued that the sentencing judge erred in his decision and asked for a fairer sentence. The British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that the sentence prescribed by the sentencing judge is within the proper scope of his judgment, but still reduced the sentence to two years less a day. As pointed out by the British Columbia Court of Appeal, Readheads past experience with the law, in which he has three previous charges for trafficking marijuana, did not deter or rehabilitate him in any way( R. v. Readhead, 2008). In R. v. Evers (2011), the accused was charged wi th the offences of unlawfully producing a controlled substance and possessing this substance for the purposes of trafficking. However, despite Everss lack of remorse for producing marijuana and her explicitly stating that she intended to continue her grow operation, the trial judge did not impose any jail time. The trial judge stated that there was no point in imprisoning Evers as doing so would only make her a martyr for the legalization of marijuana (R. v. Evers, 2011). Both of these cases show the ineffectiveness of the current law in deterring individuals from possessing and using cannabis. The prohibition of cannabis and criminalization of its users does not deter people from consuming it. The evidence on this point is clear: tougher penalties do not lead to lower rates of cannabis use (Chandra, 2014). Perhaps it is time that there should be an examination of the actual effects of cannabis on Canadians rather than blindly prohibiting the possession of cannabis. Alternatives to Cannabis Prohibition As discussed above, all available evidence indicates that the criminalization of cannabis use is ineffective, costly, and constitutes poor public policy. Globally, there is growing debate about the efficacy of criminalizing drugs such as cannabis, in particular that the health, social, economic and criminal harms of this approach outweighs any intended benefits (Chandra, 2014). As such, there are three main alternatives to full cannabis prohibition: decriminalization, partial prohibition and legalization. Models of cannabis decriminalization vary greatly, but generally involve removing possession of small amounts of cannabis from the sphere of criminal law. Essentially, prohibition remains, but instead of incarceration the use of cannabis becomes civil violations punishable by fines (Babor et al., 2010). Removing criminal penalties for cannabis possession should result in a reduction in both the number of individuals involved in the criminal justice system and the cost of enforcement , thus reducing the burden to individuals and to the legal system. Moreover, evidence suggests that a decriminalization approach can reduce some of the adverse social impacts of criminalization (CAMH, 2014). An example of a country that follows a decriminalization model is Portugal. Since the implementation of this system, Portugal has seen declines in substance misuse and in drugà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ related harm, a reduced burden on the criminal justice system, and a reduction in the use of illicit drugs by adolescents (Room et al., 2010). While it is not possible to conclusively attribute these trends in Portugal to a shift in decriminalization, these findings present strong support that at the very least, decriminalizing cannabis does not result in major problems. Partial prohibition regimes of cannabis possession are brought about by two distinct approaches, namely either de facto legalization or de jure legalization. Within the model of de facto legislation, cannabis use is formally prohibited by criminal law, yet applicable laws are not enforced and thus not sanctioned by any punitive interventions (Babor et al., 2010). Netherlands famously takes a de facto legalization approach to cannabis. Although the drug is still deemed illegal, personal use of cannabis is tolerated and is made available through dispensaries called coffee shops. Cannabis use or sale outside of the regulated spaces of these coffee shops is followed by police warnings or fines (Babor et al., 2010). In other words, personal cannabis use and supply to the end consumer in the Netherlands is regulated similarly to alcohol or tobacco use in many jurisdictions. One of the major benefits cited for the legally tolerated dispensaries is that it helps consumers from being exposed to illegal markets where there may be availability of harder drugs (Room et al., 2010). Evidence demonstrates that the Netherlands has a lower rate of cannabis use than in the United States which suggests that partial legalization of cannabis will not necessarily lead to an increase in use. Within the model of de jure legalization, personal use quantities are allowed to be carried and consumed by citizens. Punishments of cannabis use are either explicitly written into the drug statute or the scope of the law does not include cannabis possession (Chandra, 2014). These reforms have so far predominantly been aimed at selected places (e.g. the home) or at specific populations (e.g. medical marijuana users) (Babor et al., 2010). An example of a country that follows a de jure model of legalization is Spain. In Spain, possession or use of cannabis is prohibited by the law, yet there is no punishment or enforcement when involving small amounts. In 2002, Cannabis Social Clubs appeared in the country. These are non-commercial organizations of users who get together to cultivate and distribute enough cannabis to meet their personal needs without having to turn to the black market (Alonso, 2011, p. 2). Since, 2002 it is estimated that Cannabis Social Clubs have enabled several thou sand people to stop financing the black market and to know the quality and origin of what they are consuming, whilst creating jobs and tax revenue (Alonso, 2011). A third alternative that has been widely supported is legalization of cannabis with health-focused regulation. Legalization removes the social harms and costs associated with prohibition. In effect, legalization endorses marijuana as socially acceptable. It eliminates criminal penalties, reducing prices, increasing availability, and de-stigmatizing use (Broughton, 2014). Moreover, it is estimated that removing criminal and civil penalties for possession of cannabis would eliminate more than $ 1 billion dollars that is spent annually in Canada to enforce these ineffective laws (Evans, 2013). Advocates of legalization of cannabis point out that cannabis is no more harmful than alcohol or tobacco and should therefore be regulated in a similar fashion. In the same way that alcohol prohibition in Canada was an abject failure which promoted crime and actually loosened the federal governments control over the importation and production of the substance, cannabis can also be seen as leading down the same path (CAMH, 2014). Moreover, advocates in favor of cannabis legalization claim that cannabis use is not an act of criminal nature and thus the federal government does not have the authority to ban it. They further argue that cannabis is neither harmful nor immoral and thus only the province has the power to regulate the use, distribution, and sale of marijuana (CAMH, 2014). This argument would equate marijuana with alcohol, which is also regulated independently by the governments of each province. Like all drugs, cannabis use has negative outcomes (Evans, 2013). However, the evidence shows that this does not justify the prohibition of the drug. For example, legal substances such as alcohol and tobacco can be far more dangerous and addicting than cannabis can ever be capable of, but these substances are still considered legal in Canada. Instead of focusing on the evidence, the mere prohibition of cannabis use only leads to further harm for users. Some opponents of legalization fear that it would send the wrong message about the risks of cannabis. But current rates of cannabis use in Canada already suggest that youth are not getting the right message (MacQueen, 2013). For instance, despite prohibition, 23% of Ontarios high school students and 40% of young adults use cannabis. A 2013 UNICEF study of 29 Wealthy nations found that Canadian youth rank first in cannabis use, but third from last in tobacco use -even though cannabis is illegal while tobacco is legal (MacQueen, 2013). Moreover, an examination of public opinion polls over the last few decades shows a steady increase in the proportion of Canadians who support the legalization of marijuana, rising from only 19 percent in 1977 to 57 percent in 2012 (Grenier, 2013). Lorne Bozinoff of Forum Research Inc says that given these statistics, the public no longer favors devoting time and resources required to restrict marijuana use and possession, instead favoring a legalize and tax strategy (Grenier, 2013, p.4). It is also important to note that legalization alone does not reduce the health risk and harms of cannabis. Instead legalization presents the government with the opportunity to regulate cannabis to mitigate those risks something that cannot be effectively done under decriminalization or prohibition (CAMH, 2014). Legalization under a health-focused model is based on the fundamental principles of harm reduction. Harm reduction is a pragmatic approach to reducing individual and social harms associated with drug use. This approach accepts that certain interventions focused on diminishing the harmfulness of a substance, even if they increase the extent of substance use, may be able to reduce the total adverse consequences on the individual, as well as society (Pates Riley, 2012). In regards to cannabis use, harm reduction approaches acknowledge that there are no known effective solutions for completely eliminating drug-use or drug-related problems in the public. Therefore, the main char acteristic of harm reduction is that it focuses on the reduction of harm as its primary goal, rather than reduction of drug use per se (CAMH, 2014). It is important to note that harm reduction principles are not meant to promote drug use, but instead recognizes the reality of drug use and measures success in terms of quality of life improvements for the individual (Broughton, 2014). For example, legalization of cannabis would attempt to reduce the harmfulness of cannabis use, without necessarily stopping drug use altogether. To reduce harm, legalization of cannabis is a necessary but definitely not a sufficient- condition. It must include effective control on availability and regulation that steers users towards less harmful practices. Conclusion Prohibition of cannabis use has not succeeded in preventing cannabis use or mitigating its harms. On the contrary, it has exacerbated the health harms of cannabis and created costly social ones as well. Legalizing and strictly regulating cannabis allows for more control over the risk factors associated with cannabis-related harm and is a better alternative to the current approach (Broughton, 2014). It is important to realize that the Canada of 1997 when the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (1996) was first established bears almost no resemblance to Canada of today. This explains why since its inception, the Criminal Code has changed many ambiguous laws to legalize and decriminalize certain actions (e.g., prostitution, assisted suicide, etc). Essentially, the laws have needed to evolve in order to better accommodate societal needs and advancing scientific research. Similarly, based on current research showing that criminalizing cannabis has not been an effective policy, perhaps it is time to re-examine our approach to cannabis use and advocated for legalization. References Alonso, M. (2011). Cannabis social clubs in Spain: A normalizing alternative underway. Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies, 9. Retrieved March 3, 2017, from http://druglawreform.info/en/publications/legislative-reform-series-/item/1095-cannabis-social-clubs-in-spain Babor, T., J., Caulkins, Edwards, G., Fischer, B., Foxcroft, D., Humphreys, K., . . . Strang, J. (2010). Drug policy and the public good. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Blaszczak-Boxe, A. (2014). Marijuanas History: How One Plant Spread Through the World. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.livescience.com/48337-marijuana-history-how-cannabis-travelled-world.html Broughton, M. (2014). The Prohibition of Marijuana. Manitoba Policy Perspectives, 1(1). Retrieved March 1, 2017, from https://umanitoba.ca/centres/mipr/media/1._Prohibition_of_Marijuana_Broughton.pdf CAMH. (2014). Cannabis Policy Framework. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from https://www.camh.ca/en/hospital/about_camh/influencing_public_policy/Documents/CAMHCannabisPolicyFramework.pdf Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c11 Chandra, F. (2014). The Current Approach to Cannabis Possession in Canada: Issues and Alternatives. Sociology and Anthropology Student Union Undergraduate Journal, 1. Retrieved March 3, 2017, from summit.sfu.ca/system/files/iritems1/15204/SASU-Chandra.pdf Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, SC 1996, c 19. Retrieved from http://canlii.ca/t/l44r Criminal Code, RSC (1985) c C-46 Evans, D. (2013). The Economic Impacts of Marijuana Legalization. The Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice, 7(4). Retrieved March 4, 2017, from http://www.globaldrugpolicy.org/Issues/Vol%207%20Issue%204/The%20Economic%20Impacts%20of%20Marijuana%20Legalization%20final%20for%20journal.pdf Grenier, E. (2013). Majority of Canadians want to loosen marijuana laws: polls . The Globe and Mail. Retrieved March 2, 2017, from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/majority-of-canadians-want-to-loosen-marijuana-laws-polls/article14010389/ Hathaway, A. D., Erickson, P. G. (2003). Drug Reform Principles and Policy Debates: Harm Reduction Prospects for Cannabis in Canada. Journal of Drug Issues, 33(2), 465-495. Retrieved March 2, 2017, from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/002204260303300209 Health Canada. (2015). Canadian Tobacco Alcohol and Drugs (CTADS): 2013 summary. Retrieved February 28, 2017, from https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canadian-tobacco-alcohol-drugs-survey/2013-summary.html Law Commission. (2004). What is a crime?: defining criminal conduct in contemporary society. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from http://www.ubcpress.ca/books/pdf/chapters/whatisacrime/whatcrime.pdf MacQueen, L. (2013). Why its time to legalize marijuana. Macleans. Retrieved March 2, 2017, from http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/why-its-time-to-legalize-marijuana/ Marihuana Medical Access Regulations, SOR/ 2001-227 (available on http://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor-2001-227/index.html) Pates, R., Riley, D. (2012). Harm Reduction in Canada: The Many Faces of Regression. Harm Reduction in Substance Use and High-risk Behaviour: International Policy and Practice. Retrieved February 26, 2017, from http://canadianharmreduction.com/sites/default/files/Harm%20Reduction%20in%20Canada.pdf Ponto, L. L., Oleary, D. S., Koeppel, J., Block, R. I., Watkins. (2004). Effect of Acute Marijuana on Cardiovascular Function and Central Nervous System Pharmacokinetics of [15O]Water: Effect in Occasional and Chronic Users. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 44(7), 751-766. Retrieved March 2, 2017, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15199080 Room, R., Fischer, B., Hall, W., Lenton, S., Reuter, P. (2010). Cannabis Policy: Moving Beyond Stalemate. Oxford University Press. R. v. Evers, 2011 BCCA 330 (available on CanLII) R. v. Malmo-Levine; R. v. Caine, [2003] 3 SCR 571, 2003 SCC 74 (available on CanLII) R. v. Parker, 2000 CanLII 5762 (ON CA), (available on CanLll) R. v. Readhead, 2008 BCCA 532 (available on CanLII) Statistics Canada. (2015). Prevalence and correlates of marijuana use in Canada, 2012. Retrieved March 2, 2017, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-003-x/2015004/article/14158-eng.htm UNICEF. (2013). Child Well-being in Rich Countries: A comparative overview. Innocenti Report. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc11_eng.pdf

America Must Reduce the Size of Government :: Political Science

â€Å"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.† —Frederic Bastiat Introduction: States exist at the expense of their citizens, who are not aware of the price they pay. Although people tend to view states as indispensable institutions to promote equality, provide security, and protect public goods; they often overlook their sacrifice of liberty and economic well-being due to government interference. Forms of states vary—liberal democratic states, welfare states, communist states etc.—throughout the world; but their artificial nature is the same: states only emerged through the consent of all the citizens. Nevertheless, states do not function by a social contract; instead, the few who are in power usually make decisions for all. In fact, people are frequently misled to justify taxation—believing that states redistribute wealth, thus creating equality through this process. However, redistribution does not necessarily mean transferring wealth from the rich to the poor. Moreover, government interference in the free market usually only hurts the e conomy—despite some economists promoting state actions during economic downturns. Only through advocating grassroots associations, paying attention to future interests, and improving literacy and access to popular literature can people realize their economic and political sacrifices to the state. 1. The Formation of States The concept of â€Å"state† is closely related to social contract thought. The social contract school of thought originated from the classic seventeenth-and-eighteenth-century political theories of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau, who tried to explain the origins of civic community and political authority. Although social contract theorists differ in their conceptions of the state of nature and the political structure under the contract, they all agree on one point: the social obligation must be willingly accepted by individuals. According to the social contract school of thought, the state—the civic community and political authority—is the result of individuals’ voluntary move from their state of nature, in which each man is sovereign and self-sufficient, to a social order, where they submit themselves to a political authority in return for protection and equality. To answer the question of why individuals tend to accept the agreement and obey the state, Thomas Hobbes, the first modern philosopher to articulate a detailed contract theory, believes that states can provide equality by equally treating their citizens.[1]  Interestingly enough, Hobbes’ model of state as an authority overruling all the subjects still applies to our modern society today. What Hobbes overlooked though, as John Locke pointed out, was the reduced liberty of individuals.

Compensation Plan †University of Phoenix †HRM Essay

A good compensation plan must include both aspects, financial and nonfinancial of a rewarding system where financial rewards, or a pay system, â€Å"assign a monetary value to each job in the organization (a base rate) and an orderly procedure for increasing the base rate (e.g., based on merit, inflation, or some combination of the two)† (Cascio, 2005, p. 425). Also, â€Å"a properly designed Pay for Performance (PFP) Program enables companies to reduce their cost of labor while increasing the average take home pay of their workforce† (Jensen, 2009). On the other hand we also will offer nonfinancial systems that will cover indirect aspects such as benefits, professional and personal development. We want to give our â€Å"sales staff a reason to get out there and sell, sell, sell† (Ward). â€Å"Rewards bridge the gap between organizational objectives and individual expectations and aspirations. To be effective, organizational reward systems should provide four things: (1) a sufficient level of rewards to fulfill basic needs, (2) equity with the external labor market, (3) equity within the organization, and (4) treatment of each member of the organization in terms of his or her individual needs† (Cascio, 2005, p. 419). New compensation plan†Pay systems are designed to attract, retain, and motivate employees† (Cascio, 2005, p. 419)The new compensation plan will be based in a performance system. â€Å"If business takes off, more pay goes to workers. If it doesn’t, the company is not locked into high fixed costs of labor. 417† This system was chosen since meets the company strategy of growth and objectives and â€Å"such variable-pay systems almost guarantee cost control. 417 (Cascio, 2005, p. 417)† and a well planed recognition system adds to the compensation plan to offset a higher level of discouragement found in a competitive selling environment and also â€Å"can be used to express gratitude, admiration, and to inspire to greater sales and greater sales initiative† (F&B Publications, 2005). Our new compensation plan will adopt a combination of base salary plus commission and bonus based on the overall performance. â€Å"Perhaps the most important objective of any pay system is fairness or equity† (Cascio, 2005, p. 419). To ensure the correctness of our plan, a committee has been created  to evaluate each employee performance, keep our compensation plan current and provide support and training at any time needed. We are also taking in consideration that our payment plan â€Å"should include a three-tier approach of immediate recognition for a job well done, short-term rewards for performance over a month or quarter, and long-term rewards for being a loyal employee over the years† (Schoeffler, 2005). -Salary: a monthly salary will be based on the job description of each position and it has the possibility of be complimented and enhanced depending of the employee performance. -Commission: a percentage of the profit will be used to increase the monthly employee compensation. -Bonus: bonuses will be given based on the performance of the sales individual each three months. Percentages will be given according to the goals met, or exceeded, so sales reps will rely on their individual performance. -Team incentives: â€Å"Team incentives provide an opportunity for each team member to receive a bonus based on the output of the team as a whole† (Cascio, 2005, p. 443). Sales personnel will have participation on this incentive to promote a teamwork environment. These events will happen at the end of the year. -On spot bonus: This is going to be granted for exceptional behavior regarding to teamwork efforts, customer satisfaction or any attitude that can be used as an example to the other workers. We â€Å"may reward the worker with a one-time bonus of $50, $100, or $500 shortly after the noteworthy actions† (Cascio, 2005, p. 441). -Incentives – † When it comes to performance incentives, the possibilities are endless† (Cascio, 2005, p. 436), and we plan to use nonfinancial reward system that will include â€Å"anything an employee values and desires that an  employer is able and willing to offer in exchange for employee contributions† (Cascio, 2005, p. 418). Based on the answers compiled from the questionnaire we created, we will develop some entertaining activities such as trips, restaurants, theaters and any other approved selection available in our committee that will be available each three months and also at the end of the year. In our committee we will also make available the following benefits that our employees can choose to participate on:-Employee stock ownership plans – As the company grows we will offer participation in the stocks of our company and a limited amount of them available to each employee for purchase. It helps â€Å"to fulfill a philosophical belief in employee ownership† 447. â€Å"ESOPs do promote an increase in employee willingness to participate in company decisions. Companies that take advantage of that willingness can harness employees’ energy and creativity† (Cascio, 2005, p. 447). -Recognition – is a non financial reward and helps to â€Å"enhance a worker’s sense of self-respect and esteem by others† (Cascio, 2005, p. 418). These recognitions will be done in the yearly meetings where all employees are going to be together and have the opportunity to see their colleague’s performance is rewarded. â€Å"Recognition amongst their peers is still the quintessential motivator, whether there’s an incentive program or not† (Shearstone)Recent data indicates that â€Å"people are more attached and committed to organizations that offer family-friendly policies, regardless of the extent to which they benefit personally from the policies† (Cascio, 2005, p. 489), therefore our plan also cover other benefits that will be extend to all employees regardless merit or performance. â€Å"Once you have great employees on board, how do you keep them from jumping ship? One way is by offering a good benefits package.† (Entrepreneur Media, Inc, n.d.)†¢Tuition aid†¢Auto insurance†¢Fitness and wellness programs†¢Counseling Service†¢Child adoption†¢Child care Social activities†¢Elder care Referral awards†¢Charter flights Family leaves†¢Flexible work arrangementsWe also developed some benefits options that will  Ã¢â‚¬Å"integrate salary and benefits into a package that will encourage the achievement of an organization’s goals† (Cascio, 2005, p. 470). They will be available to all employees and they can choose among them all. †¢Life insurance†¢Disability insurance†¢Healthy insurance†¢Other medical coverage†¢Sick leave†¢Pension plans†¢Unemployment insurance†¢401K†Evidence indicates that the perceived value of benefits rises when employers introduce choice through a flexible benefits package† (Cascio, 2005, p. 466). For that reason we expect that this pay system will bring excitement to our workforce since the opportunities are vary. This pay system should also increase motivation of our employees and deepens commitment with our customer to bring success to both the individual and the company. Following are pointed some reason that we expect to succeed with this new plan. -The final compensation at the end of the month has the opportunity to be largely increased according to the employee performance, but yet, the base salary is high enough to give the employees some breathing in order to meet the essential financial obligations. -Commissions, bonuses and team incentives. -Variety of employee services and benefits. -Friendly and family environmentBefore our pay system is implemented training will be given to all employees to ensure understanding of it. A website will be available to answer most common questions and our committee will also be available for further explanation and training as needed. References Cascio, W. F. (2005). Managing Human Resources (7th ed.). : The McGraw−Hill Companies. Entrepreneur Media, Inc (n.d.). The Basics of Employee Benefits. Retrieved April 20, 2009, from http://www.entrepreneur.com/F&B Publications (2005). Sale Incentive Ideas – Motivating Your Sales Team. Retrieved April 17, 2009, from http://www.associatedcontent.com/Jensen, M. L. (2009). 9 Key Aspects For Successful Pay For Performance Systems. EzineArticles.com. Retrieved from http://ezinearticles.com/Schoeffler, B. (2005). Employee Incentive Plans: Make Them Worthwhile. Insurance Journal. Retrieved from http://www.insurancejournal.com/Shearstone, P. (). Creating Sales Incentive Programs That Work. About.com, 2. Retrieved from http://sbinfocanada.about.com/Ward, S. (). 6 Sure Ways to Increase Sales. About.com. Retrieved from http://sbinfocanada.about.com/

News Summaries

A July 9 online article from dallasnews. com, entitled Top 10 personal finance mistakes, provides a prime example of one form of learning: lesson by failure. The article discusses ten common pitfalls when individuals are addressing their own financial tasks. By shining a spotlight on these mistakes, the article reinforces principles in Chapter 22—namely, the essential need for solid personal financial planning.Each ‘mistake’ receives a few paragraphs of attention, and the information holds more value because the author also pinpoints expert tips that can lessen the impact and occurrence of each problem.The first two discussed mistakes, for example, address the scarcity of people who develop a logical and flexible statement of goals. Too often, as the article elaborates, individuals make financial decisions based on emotion rather than factual information. In addition, those who do develop goals and plans are many times reluctant to ‘stray the course’ from initial goals. However, experts advise that adaptability and structure can strengthen financial prospects for any individual, regardless of economic standing.Budgeting, in particular, is an important skill to develop in matters of finance. Debt and savings comprise the next part of the discussion. According to the article, a surplus of people sink into credit card debt that may only be eradicated through years of payments. Prompt, maximum-level monthly payments can ease these burdens, say the experts. Debt accumulation is symptomatic of another financial planning problem mentioned in the article: savings, or the lack thereof.A depletion of saved income can negatively impact both short-term and long-term financial goals. One remedy the interviewed experts recommend involves the creation of an emergency savings fund (used in case of unexpected expenses). Such a fund would be bolstered by a set amount of money from each employee paycheck. Finally, the article concludes with warnin gs involving two other important aspects of personal finance, employee benefits and stock investment.The author argues for 401(K) plans, life insurance, and reasonable investing, respectively. Each of these subjects—if handled improperly—holds the potential for catastrophic financial consequences. 401(K)s can help ensure an individual has a secure retirement nest egg (alleviating at least one burden for the elderly); life insurance in turn ensures a family’s security, and minimal stock investing will help prevent an abolishment of personal savings.