Legal Issues

The 2008 Moot Court Tournament dealt with whether a motion for summary judgment should be granted or denied. The plaintiff is Deborah White. Mrs. White filed a lawsuit against Patrick Gibbs and OMalleys Tavern, the defendants, to recover damages for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. Mrs. Whites lawsuit is based on a claim that the defendants breached Ind. Code Ann.  7.1-5-10-15.5, and as a result, the defendants are liable for her injuries. The defendants in the case submitted a motion for summary judgment and the plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion for summary judgment.

On July 28, 2007, Bruno White was killed and his wife, Deborah White, was seriously injured in a car accident when Edward Hard collided with their automobile. At around 700 p.m., Mr. and Mrs. White entered OMalleys Tavern. Mr. Hard, Deborah Whites ex-fiance, was also at OMalleys when Mr. and Mrs. White arrived. Mr. Hard purchased a total of thirteen alcoholic beverages in the span of two and a half hours. Mr. Hard testified that he drank at least five alcoholic beverages prior to the arrival of Mr. and Mrs. White. John Daniels, the bartender, testified that starting at 707 p.m., he served Mr. Hard five shots of whiskey and one beer within a half an hour period. Mr. Daniels stated that he did not see any visible signs of Mr. Hard being intoxicated when the last drink was served.  Mrs. White also testified that she had did not see any visible signs of Mr. Hard being intoxicated while they are at the tavern. As Mr. and Mrs. White left OMalleys Tavern, Mr. Hard yelled that Mrs. White should be his wife. Mr. Hard unsuccessfully tried to hit Mr. White and ended up falling on the ground. In the police report, Mr. Daniels stated that by the time Mr. Hard left the tavern, Mr. Hard appeared to be very drunk.

After Mr. Hard entered his vehicle, he hit three cars in the parking lot and a mailbox as he began to pursue Mr. and Mrs. White. When Mr. White attempted to make a left turn, Mr. Hard, who was driving on the wrong side of the street, slammed into Mr. and Mrs. Whites vehicle. The police report stated that Mr. Hard had a blood alcohol content of .20, while the legal limit in Indiana is .08.

The appellants claimed that it is possible for a patron to be intoxicated without showing any visible signs of intoxication. Mr. Hard was sitting on a bar stool as he consumed the alcohol being served and failed to show any visible signs of intoxication to Mr. Daniels. By the time Mr. Daniels noticed Mr. Hard was intoxicated, Mr. Hard already received his last drink. According to counsel, the tavern would not be liable for Mr. Hards subsequent actions because the statute requires the person furnishing the alcoholic beverages have actual knowledge the patron is visibly intoxicated at the time the person is furnishing the alcohol, not after the last drink has already been served.

Appellants counsel also claims that Mr. Hards intoxication was not the proximate cause of the injuries sustained by Mrs. White due to Mr. Hards pre-existing intent to harm Mr. White. Counsel cited Fast Eddies v. Hall 688 N.E.2d 1270 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997), which held that the willful, malicious criminal act of a third party is an intervening act which breaks the causal chain between the alleged negligence and the resulting harm. Counsel argued that Mr. Hards hostile behavior towards Mr. White showed the intent to commit a criminal act.  Therefore, intoxication was not the proximate cause of Mr. Hards actions.

Deborah Whites counsel claimed that Mr. Daniels had actual knowledge of Mr. Hards visible intoxication. Counsel stated that factors such as what and how much the person was known to have consumed, the time involved, the persons behavior at the time, and the persons condition shortly after leaving, should be taken into account to determine a persons actual knowledge of patrons intoxication. Ashlock v. Norris 475 N.E.2d 1167, 1170 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985). Mr. Daniels had a computerized record of how many drinks Mr. Hard ordered and he stated that he could tell Mr. Hard was very drunk. Appellees counsel argued that all of these factors show that Mr. Daniels had actual knowledge that Mr. Hard was visibly intoxicated.

Appellees counsel argued that Mr. Hards intoxication was the proximate cause of the injuries caused by the automobile accident. Counsel argued that Mr. Hard being intoxicated set into motion the events that led to Mrs. White being injured. Considering that Mr. Hard was intoxicated when he left the tavern and decided to drive his vehicle, it was reasonably foreseeable that he could kill or seriously injure someone. Appellees counsel claimed that based on the evidence, a jury could reasonably infer more than one conclusion regarding the disputed issues, therefore the summary judgment should be denied.

I agree with the appellee that the motion for summary judgment should be denied. There are genuine issues of material fact in this case that should be set forth before a trier of fact. There is the possibility that actual knowledge of intoxication can be shown with circumstantial evidence, therefore the case should not be merely dismissed based on Mr. Danielss testimony that he did not see Mr. Hard show any visible signs of intoxication. Both parties had strong arguments regarding whether or not Mr. Hard possessed the intent to commit a criminal act. Factors such as Mr. Hards hostile behavior toward Mr. White and the fact that he was obviously intoxicated should be taken into account and decided by a jury to determine if the intoxication was a proximate cause of Mrs. Whites injuries.

According to a biblical worldview, the issue of the taverns responsibility to the patrons in the bar may differ from the limited liability cited in Ind. Code Ann.  7.1-5-10-15.5. Appellants counsel argued that the tavern is only liable if the bartender has actual knowledge that the patron is intoxicated when the bartender is furnishing the alcoholic beverage. Even though Mr. Daniels stated that he could tell Mr. Hard was very drunk right before he exited the bar, it can be argued that according to the law, he did not need to intervene at that point. From a biblical perspective, it is important to mitigate any harm that could be caused to another when there is a chance to safely intervene. Even though Mr. Daniels may not have been legally obligated to stop Mr. Hard from getting in his vehicle, from a moral standpoint, he would have helped protect Mr. Hard and any people Mr. Hard ended up endangering, by preventing him from leaving the bar and getting in the car. As one of the judges mentioned during the competition, he believes he should be able exercise his capacity as a judge to interpret the law in such a way that holds the tavern liable in order to prevent people in Mr. Hards position from endangering the people in the community. The judges perspective illustrates the issue that every major legal tradition struggles to link its formal structures and processes with the beliefs and ideals of its people. Law and religionexist in dialectical interaction.

Even though all of the laws currently in place may not be a direct reflection of the biblical worldview, I think the judicial system currently in place is a good method for resolving disputes. The role of the judiciary is to interpret the laws while considering the intent of the legislature and the circumstances regarding each particular case.  Judges in this country have always had to maintain the balance between what is morally right and what is legal. Ultimately, it is important for every citizen, not only those in the legal community, to understand that laws and our actions should be utilized to preserve harmony, protect those who are vulnerable and be a reflection of our respect for each other as human beings.

One of the pros of this verdict is that Frances aim of ensuring public order and the rights of its entire citizenry got a boost. France is a multi-ethnic society whose members are drawn from a wide range of cultural, religious and political backgrounds. While Muslims comprise only a minority of the countrys population, allowing them to wear to school attire which manifest their religion is unhealthy (Kelly, 2009). It may attract members of other religions to borrow a leaf and dress in clothes which manifest their religion. There is thus the risk that in the long-run, the country will be split along religious lines.

Further, banning the wearing of such attire in school benefits the affected students too. The search for identity within a group is an important human need. Allowing the few students to wear such items of clothing makes it easier for the students to identify with other Muslim students and draw away from the non-Muslim students. The rest of the students would also find it easier to isolate or victimize the Muslim students as a group. The long-term effect would be that the Muslim students would have a poorly developed sense of social identity, adversely affecting the development of their social skills. The ban therefore not only protects the rights and freedoms of the wider French population, but also protects those of the minority group. Students are reasonably young and dynamic and should be given every opportunity to experiment with and embrace diversity.

The downside of this verdict is that it dispossesses the minority group of an important element of not only its religious identity, but also its cultural identity. It is important to note that the headscarves pose no danger or threat to anyone in the school or neighbourhood (Kelly, 2009). The children, and their parents, wear the headscarves as a symbol of their culture and their religion. It is expected that even many of those who wear such clothes do not visit Mosques. To the students, the attire is more about their culture than their religion which they may not understand well yet. Banning the attire is therefore interpreted as a assault on the affected peoples culture.

If one of the main purposes of law is to effectively govern and condition human behavior then the Massachusetts seatbelt law is fundamentally a failed law.  It is a failure because, as the statistics demonstrate, the majority of Massachusetts residents openly acknowledge that they frequently fail to wear a seatbelt in a variety of circumstances.  Perhaps the most surprising statistic relates to the fact that more Rhode Island residents report wearing seatbelts and Rhode Island does not even have a seatbelt law.  One may reasonably wonder, given some of the comments reported from Massachusetts residents regarding a general aversion to and resentment of an alleged nanny state which usurps very personal decisions, whether the Massachusetts seatbelt statistic would be higher had the law never been enacted in the first instance.  For purposes of law considerations this would have significant implications specifically, it would indicate a lack of legitimacy in the seatbelt law and it would also suggest social fissures that might very well represent a lack of respect for the governing body which enacted the bill and a consequent decrease in social unity and cohesion.  Rather than more carefully examining why Massachusetts residents fail to comply with the law, and a variety of different reasons are offered, Massachusetts has instead decided to regulate driving behavior more intimately by proposing a bill which would allow law enforcement to stop, and sanction in the form of fines, drivers in Massachusetts solely on the basis of not wearing a seatbelt.  I would not vote for the bill, although I believe that it is entirely reasonable and a very minor intrusion, primarily because of the way this incremental type of legislative process undermines the purpose of law by initially promising minor types of social control and then continually expanding the scope of the original law until citizens forget how much personal discretion and freedom they have lost.  It would have been much better had Massachusetts originally enacted either a more comprehensive primary seatbelt law or no seatbelt law.  It may be safer for politicians to hedge their bets, and pass incomplete legislation such as the original seatbelt bill, but this type of legislative inadequacy can create a type of anti-social backlash that threatens both the purpose of law and the social control that law seeks to secure.

It is an unfortunate reality that common sense and sociological phenomenon often diverge in ways that are commonly thought to be illogical and counterintuitive such seems to be the case with the Massachusetts bill, and this is why I would vote against even though I would probably vote in favor of a primary seatbelt law if the current secondary law was first revoked and the entire primary law then put to a vote after public discussion and debate that included more interests than politicians, insurance lobbyists trying to minimize accident claims, and car manufactures seeking to minimize tort liability flowing from automobile accidents.  Social control, while a legitimate aim of the law and a valid purpose in many circumstances, can only be accomplished when the underlying law is viewed as representing social values generally and as being narrowly designed to avoid expansive or personally offensive intrusions.  From a sociological view, as applied in legal contexts, social control can be achieved in a variety of ways.  This is clearly illustrated, with respect to the seatbelt law issue, in the statistics compiled and distributed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Residents of states with primary seatbelt laws typically have a 20 higher reported use of seatbelts. This social control is achieved initially through the threat of being pulled over and fined by law enforcement officers.  The fines are not substantial nonetheless, this is an affirmative type of sanction under the color of state or local authority.  It is an intrusion the fact that Americas states approach the seatbelt issue differently suggests that there is no monolithic social value with respect to seatbelts.  Social control, however, is much more subtle than mere sanctions or even public and private recriminations.  There is, for instance, a type of social control that is achieved after the initial passage of a law which functions to regulate social behavior in a sort of subconscious way which supplements and may to some extant supersede the sanctions impact on behavior.  While people might initially be fearful of being fined, and therefore wear a seatbelt, there comes a time when wearing the seatbelt becomes a seemingly natural behavioral reaction to getting in a car rather than a naked fear of being sanctioned.  This is the insidious nature of this Massachusetts bill, this conditioning feature of the social control, that will make governmental law-making appear as an ever-expanding intrusion into personal decision-making.   In my view, this is what some Massachusetts residents are objecting to when they criticize governmental intrusion.  These people do not believe that seatbelts are bad, they do not mock those whom wear their seatbelts regularly, but they do seem to resent the types of laws which are increasingly expansive and increasingly intrusive.

The main problem, in my view, is that the Massachusetts seatbelt law was flawed from the very beginning the legislature should have proposed and debated a primary seatbelt law or they should have withdrawn all seatbelt legislation.  I am in favor of primary seatbelt legislation however, I am not in favor of piecemeal laws which undermine the legitimacy of the law and potentially motivate people to resist social control by being continuously expanded.  The Rhode Island statistics should be a cause for worry.  The residents of Rhode Island have no seatbelt law and they have a higher reported level of seatbelt users than Massachusetts which has such a law.  The purpose of the Massachusetts law, regulating seatbelt behavior, is clearly a failure.  Social control has not been achieved and superimposing sanctions onto a preexisting law will not necessarily enhance social control.  It will likely increase the number of seatbelt wearers, and government revenues, but it may provoke a social order backlash.  This would undermine one of the most important features of a public safety law.

Fire captains and fire paramedics have a greater responsibility of rescuing lives and property in case of a fire incidence. Their noble task is full of dangers and risks and is heavily governed by legal and moral principles. Fire departments face the challenges of making sure that they are ready day and night as they can be called on duty any time. Although it is clearly known to both the firefighters and paramedics that they have a legal responsibility of responding to any emergency of fire incidence while on duty, there arises the controversy of how to handle the same kind of situation during off-duty. Whereas some jurisdictions clearly state mandates for firefighters on and off-duty, others do not have clear guidelines on the same leaving the officers to use their own discretion. In the United States, fire captains and fire paramedics face differing legal responsibilities in cases of duty to act situations.

This paper explores the extent and level to which firefighters and fire paramedics have on duty to act. A number of legal cases and their outcomes that have been experienced in the U.S. over the years are illustrated for better understanding of the issue. Under the same, legal differences between being on duty and being off duty for firefighters and fire paramedics are discussed. An in-depth look at being off duty and what paramedics and firefighters are legally expected to do if faced with a situation is given. The paper also explores on available laws that protect firefighters and paramedics on and off duty. In respect to the legal responsibilities of fire departments, the paper suggests some of the things that the fire department as an employer needs to do to have protection from potential legal issues. Finally, the paper explores the effects of having a higher trained fire department versus a less trained volunteer department as far as risk of legal issues is concerned.

Firefighters and fire paramedics in the U.S.
To understand legal responsibilities of firefighters and fire paramedics, it is important to understand who they are and the skills that they posses. The City of South San Francisco Human Resource Department (2010) defines a firefighterparamedic as an individual who does carries out a number of Mobile Intensive Care Paramedic duties which may include fighting fire, providing medical aid as well as being involved in other activities meant to protect life and property. Other than being called in case of a fire incidence, a paramedicfirefighter is supposed to maintain firefighting apparatus and train people in ways of preventing fires. He or she is also required to carry out inspections and advise on fire safety precautions. Any other related task also lies as a responsibility to a firefighter or a fire paramedic.

Primarily, the duties of a firefighter are almost the same as those of a fire paramedic. A fire paramedic however has both the skills of a firefighter and those of a paramedic. A fire paramedic has a dual function and is therefore skilled in suppressing fire, performing search and rescue missions, preventing fire as well as ensuring public safety. In most fire departments, the dual firefightersfire paramedics usually alternate their duties of firefighting and paramedic functions. According to Robinson (2006), a firefighterfire paramedic is usually assigned to a rescue ambulance in case of fire incidences and is always prepared for either of the duties as may be required. A firefighter will on the other hand perform fire attack roles including providing ventilation, evacuating people and property as well as doing exposure protection duties. Fire protection duties include suppressing fire, preventing fire, controlling and putting off fire in addition to attending to emergency situations which are a risk to life, property or environment. These are legal mandates and responsibilities for employees in fire protection activities as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor. Firefighters and fire paramedics are examples of employees who are involved in fire protection activities.

The above responsibilities and authorities as defined by the law are primarily applicable to fire departments at the municipal, county, district or state level. This class of firefighters fire paramedics therefore have a duty to act role. There are also trained volunteer firefighters who may be employed by private fire departments or just possessing the skills but not attached to any department to offer such services. Such firefighters may not necessarily be obliged to carry out the above described duties.

Even with the enormous responsibilities that firefighters and fire paramedics have and the so called duty to act, there are extents to which these may apply. A fire department always has people ready to respond to any emergency in 24 hours in a day. As long as a firefighter is on duty, then he or she is required to respond to any emergency call requiring for his services as defined by the state, district or municipality in which they are operating. In most firefighting departments, the firefighters are provided with home-like accommodation since they spend most of the hours in the department and may even be called on duty during odd hours as may be necessary. It is not uncommon to have fire fighters and fire paramedics work overtime most of the times so as to meet their obligations. The Novato Fire District for instance usually has overtime shifts for firefighters and calls back its employees in case of unusual events like major fires among other serious disasters (Novato Fire Protection District, 2010). In such situations where the fire department has its staff on duty, then the duty to act responsibility is applicable to the firefightersparamedics. Duty hours not only encompass the hours when the fire officers are directly involved in responding to emergency situations but also cover the time the officers spend studying or training others on fire safety measures. During this time, firefighters and fire paramedics have a duty to act (Firemen Jobs, 2009).

While off duty, the legal responsibilities of fire captains and fire paramedics may not be abiding even in cases of duty to act situations. However this depends on the jurisdiction under which the firefighter is operating. Furthermore, such a situation requires more of moral than legal responsibility and therefore the staff may not be bound to this duty. For instance, Reistad (2009) illustrates a case where firefighters together with other citizens were involved in rescuing occupants of a vehicle that was burning. The incident that occurred in Milwaukee was an example of a duty to act situation. Among the rescuers were a police officer off duty who also has legal responsibilities of rescuing lives and property. This situation is surrounded by both legal and moral responsibilities. One of the firefighters was noted to have stated that their oath of duty encompasses a duty to act whether off or on duty.
The controversial question occurs in trying to draw a clear line into whether a firefighterparamedic is still regarded as such while off duty or whether the title and responsibilities only apply when one is on duty. This kind of situation has led to legal cases involving fire departments and its employees mainly in duty to act situations. The scenario is not a simple one as acting or not acting in such cases may lead to legal cases. If for instance a firefighter who is off duty came across a fire incident, they may choose to take action or not to. As stated earlier, some states in the U.S. have put statutes mandating anyone who comes across such scenarios to offer the best possible help. A firefighter in Vermont may therefore be charged of not acting in such a scenario (EMS Responder, 2010). He or she may not necessarily be directly involved in putting off the fire or rescuing but may help in calling up for help from fire departments.

As stated earlier, the extent and level to which duty to act applies may lead to legal cases. There have been several scenarios that have led to legal cases involving firefighters and fire paramedics versus states or individuals. A classic example of failure on the part of fire department while on course of duty is a case filed by a fire victim Shaffin Ahmed in a fire incidence in Queens in November 7, 2009. When the apartment on 65th Street where Ahhmed caught fire, the New York fire department dispatched its rescue team to 62nd Street instead of the 65th Street and before the error was discovered, the officers had already wasted some 15 precious minutes that would have saved the victims. Ahmed suffered the injuries that cost him 50,000 while trying to rescue the victims of the fire which the fire department delayed in responding.

On and off duty responsibilities of firefighters and fire paramedics
While on duty, it is an obligation that fire captains and paramedics respond to situations that may require their services, failure to which they may face disciplinary actions. This is unlike off duty officials. When on duty, a firefighter paramedic have all the resources necessary in tackling any incidence that may appear. This therefore means that they have a legal responsibility of offering their services whether called on or not. The fire department can even take disciplinary measures against its employees who fail to fulfill their duties in situations requiring their services. For instance, the Atlanta Fire Department had to discipline three of its firefighters who failed in their duty in a shooting incidence in December 2009. The disciplinary action was taken on the grounds that the fire officers did not asses a store clerk who was wounded in the incidence having assumed that he was already dead (Varone, 2010). Such an incidence was serious enough to cause the suing of the fire department hence the disciplinary action.

It is possible however to find that fire departments are not able to respond appropriately to emergency situations even with the availability of on-duty officers. This may be probably due to lack of necessary facilities in rescuing various situations. Since firefighters and paramedics deal with varying emergency cases, some of them may present challenging situations to them due to lack of enough facilities. In such a situation, the fire department or its employees may face charges if it is determined that they failed to respond appropriately. The situation is usually very hard for the employees as some of the situations may be beyond their level of handling and even calling for more assistance may not help. This means that on duty fire officers are prone to facing charges if for instance a life is lost during the rescue process. A relative of a deceased for instance may sue an officer on duty on the claims that they failed to act appropriately to rescue the life of their loved one. This becomes a very challenging situation since the firefighterparamedics may have tried all that they could have done but the situation is beyond reversal. The worst thing however for a firefighterfire paramedic who is on duty is to fail to respond to a call or a situation whether called or not as this would amount to negligence of their legal responsibility.

Unless a firefighterparamedic is in a jurisdiction where they are obliged to offer help while off duty, moral responsibility reigns. It is often hard and challenging to deal with duty to act situations while off duty even when one would like to help. One challenge is that these officers may not have much to offer in terms of help since they may not be having the necessary equipment. They have to weigh between risking their own lives and trying to save other lives or properties. These individuals are however better positioned to offer help even if not in a direct manner. First, they are in a better position of calling for help from fire departments if none has arrived at the incident. Moral responsibility may move them to help in rescuing and evacuating in the best ways they can. This is so because most of the firefighters and paramedics bear a higher personal responsibility of giving their lives to the course of others.

Off duty fire officers and paramedics will however be hesitant in offering help in fear that they may end up being sued just in case a life gets lost in the process. While it may not be within their means to prevent loss of lives, some people may take advantage of such situations to seek compensation from firefighters and fire departments. This is a very likely case if there is a law that obliges the officers to act even while off duty.

What can Fire Departments do
With so many hazards and challenges surrounding a firefighterparamedics job, it is pertinent to have laws to protect them while on and off duty. On duty employees are better covered in the law since they can get compensation if they suffer harm while on duty. The Illinois state has a Line of Duty Compensation Act that protects paramedics and firefighters who die or suffer harm while in the course of duty. It is fortunate that firefightersparamedics have the right to be paid overtime pay whenever they are called upon to work overtime, thanks to the U.S. department of labor. An officer responding while not on duty is however not covered and therefore can be considered to just be offering humanitarian assistance. Such acts may shape the role of on duty and off duty fire officers whereby off duty officers may be reluctant to offer help due to lack of such protection. In general however, the law is deficient in as far as protecting firefighters and paramedics on or off duty is concerned.

It is clear that fire departments are faced by enormous legal challenges while executing their duties. Incompetence in their employees in following laid down procedures and legal directions can lead the departments into unending cases every time they are involved in executing their roles. This is especially in cases of duty to act situation. To protect itself from such legal issues, a fire department is supposed to hire competent individuals. In addition, being well equipped in fire suppression and rescue missions coupled with following laid down legal procedures would go a long way in saving the departments from legal confrontations. Perhaps it would be even safer to operate a less trained volunteer fire department than having a higher trained department since duty to act would not be mandatory and would save the department from many legal battles.

Conclusion
On duty act situations present a challenge to fire captains and fire paramedics across the United States. The legal on duty act responsibility however is mainly applicable only when these fire officials are on duty. Interpreting this responsibility is however challenging and has led to several legal cases. Firefighters and paramedics ought to understand their legal responsibilities while off and on duty especially in duty to act situations. It is unfortunate that most laws only protect fire officers while on duty making most of them hesitant to offer help while off duty. It would be wise for fire departments to enlighten their staff on legal responsibilities in addition to being well equipped in order to avoid legal battles. Otherwise, it would be safer to operate a volunteer fire department than a higher trained department to avoid some unnecessary legal issues.

The experience the Jews and other minor races went through during the Nazi regime was traumatizing and its magnitude exceeded virtually any other genocide that has ever occurred in the history of mankind. People were imprisoned in various camps across Germany where they went through severe torture and millions of them were persecuted and brutally murdered by the Nazis under the leadership of former German chancellor, Adolf Hitler. The devastating experience took more than a decade before it ended at the close of WW II. By then, it had claimed the lives of more than six million Jews living Europe where the Nazi regime either occupied or had significant influence and millions of other groups of people considered to be inferior by the Nazi regime. After the Holocaust, the international community took the responsibility of ensuring that all the Nazi leaders who were responsible for the genocide were duly punished for the atrocities they committed.

Concentration camps
Between the years 1933 and 1945, the Nazis of Germany established more than twenty thousand camps for imprisoning its victims numbering several millions. These camps were utilized as transit camps serving as way stations that were temporary, forced hard labor camps, as well as extermination camps which were exclusively or basically built for carrying out mass murders. From the moment the Nazi regime rose to power back in the year 1933, it constantly built thousands of detention facilities mainly aimed at eliminating and imprisoning its perceived state enemies. Most of the prisoners, who were detained in the concentration camps in the early days, were German social democrats, socialists, communists, homosexuals, Jehovahs Witnesses, Roma (Gypsies), and individuals who were accused of being deviant with what was perceived to be social behaviors. These detention camps were commonly known as the concentration camps due to the fact that those detained in them were basically physically concentrated in a single location.

The first Germans concentration camps were established shortly after the appointment of Hitler as chancellor of the nation at the beginning of 1933. Within two weeks after the Nazis rose to power, the Schutzstaffel (SS) that is protection squadrons, the Sturmabteilungen (SA) that is, the Storm Troopers, the Nazis party elite guard, the local civilian and the police organized several detention camps for imprisoning the perceived and the real opponents opposed to the Nazi policy. The authorities of the country established numerous camps allover the country on an unplanned basis in order to handle properly the masses of prisoners who were being arrested because of being alleged of being subversives. Larger camps were established by the SS in Oranienburg which is in the north of Berlin Lichtenburg, in Saxony Dachau, located in the northwest of Munich and Esterwegen, which is near Hamburg. In the Berlin, the facility of Columbia Haus held inmates who were under Gestapos investigation until 1936.  

After the SA gave the SS independence in 1934, during the Rhm purge wake, Hitler who was the countrys chancellor by then empowered Heinrich Himmler, who was the SS Reich leader to centralize all the management of the camps and also formalize all the camps in the country in a systematic manner. After the last month of the year 1934, the SS was given authority to be the only agency in the country with formal authority of establishing and managing the detention facilities, however the civilian local authorities went on with the task of managing and establishing detention camps and forced labor camps throughout the country. By 1937, the concentration camps that still existed were only four and they were Buchenwald, near Weimar Sachsenhausen, near Berlin Dachau, near Munich and the Lichtenburg concentration camp in Saxony that was mainly used for imprisoning the female inmates.  

Eicke, the commandant of the concentration camp of Dachau developed procedures and an organization for guarding and administering the concentration camp. The commandant issued regulations clearly stipulating how the prisoners were to be treated and duties that were supposed to be carried out by the perimeter guards. The practice, structure and organization that were developed by Eicke in governing the Dachau concentration camp became the most preferred model and were therefore adopted by the Nazi regime throughout the nation as the concentration camps increased.  

The concentration camp of Auschwitz was one of the oldest camps in Germany, it was also the largest and the most complex of its kind in the entire nation to be established by under the Nazi regime. This particular concentration camp comprised of three major camps which were all used to imprison people for purposes of forced labor, whereby the inmates in this facility were basically laborers. One of the three camps within the Auschwitz camp was also used for a long period of time as a major center for killing prisoners. The three camps of Auschwitz were located about thirty seven miles to the west Krakow, located near the border of prewar German-Polish, which is in the upper region of Silesia, a region where the Nazis annexed in the late 1930s after they invaded and conquered Poland. The authorities of SS are the ones that established the three camps of Auschwitz near the Oswiecim Polish city. The complex camp of Auschwitz was under the concentration camps of Inspectorate. Until the year 1942, the concentration camps of Inspectorate were an SS agency head office.  
 
The bureaucratic, systematic and state sponsored murder and persecution of the prisoners and all the individuals opposed to the Nazi policy was known as the Holocaust. Through the Holocaust, more than six million people of Jew origin were persecuted and murdered by the Nazis together with its supporters and collaborators. The Greek word, Holocaust, means sacrificing by the use of fire. The Nazis of Germany after rising to power, believed and spread a propaganda throughout the country and in the neighboring nations that the Germans were much more superior racially as compared to the Jews who they perceived to be inferior. The Nazis perceived the Jews to be a foreign threat to the racial community of the Germans and thus had to be eliminated by all means to ensure that the so called superior racial society of Germany does no lose its superiority to the Jews in future.

During the Holocaust era, the authorities of Germany also targeted several other groups of people as a result of their inferiority that was perceived by the Nazis. It was the policy of the Nazi that all the inferior races needed to be eliminated from the world scene. Some of the races besides the Jews that fell in the inferiority bracket of elimination included some Slavic people such as Russians and Poles Roma (Gypsies), and the disabled individuals. The Holocaust was also used for persecuting other groups of people on behavioral, ideological and political grounds. The main groups of people that were persecuted on these grounds included the homosexuals, the Jehovahs Witenesses, the Socialists and the Communists.

By the time the Nazi regime rose to power, the population of the Jewish people in Europe was more than nine million. The greatest number of the Jews who were living in Europe lived in nations where the Nazi regime had a lot of influence or would eventually occupy during the era of the second global conflict. By the mid 1940s, the Nazis together with their supporters and collaborators had killed almost two thirds of the Jews living in Europe, which was part of their final solution that is, murdering all the Jews living in Europe. Despite the fact that the Jews who were considered by the Nazis to pose the greatest threat to the people of Germany, and were thus the main targets of the Nazi racism, there were other victims as well. These included about two hundred thousand Roma (Gypsies), a similar number of physically and mentally disabled patients who were mainly Germans. The latter victims were living in various institutional settings in the country, and they were killed through a program known as Euthanasia.

As the tyranny of the Nazis spread across the entire European continent, the Germans together with their supporters and collaborators murdered and persecuted millions of people. About two to three million prisoners of the soviet war were killed or died due to neglect, starvation, maltreatment or disease. The Nazis mainly targeted the Polish who were non-Jewish for murdering and deported several millions of Soviet and Polish civilians in Germany to do forced labor.  

The chief method that was used to kill the prisoners that were held in various camps across the country was basically poisoning. The poison gas that was used for killing the prisoners was mainly obtained from IG Farben, which was a chemical company based in German. The prisoners also died in huge numbers due to torture, starvation andor mass shootings. Originally, most of the prisoners were killed efficiently through the use of carbon monoxide, the inmates to be killed were in most cases locked in gas chambers before the poisonous gas could be introduced and kill them all. Millions of prisoners died out of starvation and diseases as the Nazis neglected them intentionally so that they could die in great agony without using a lot of war resources. Others were made to work without food or water and they could finally die while working. There were several prisoners who were killed by the management of the camps for breaching the camp rules and regulations, most of such offenders were killed by hanging. The Nazis allowed the German doctors to carryout very fatal medical experiments on the prisoners held at the camps, many prisoners on whom such fatal experiments were carried out died either immediately or shortly after.

There were several concentration camps in Germany that were specifically designed and equipped for carrying out mass killings especially through the use of gas chambers. In most early concentration camps, exhaust smokes from tank engines or truck engines were forcefully pumped into gassing vans that were completely sealed, they could also be pumped into gas chambers that were specifically constructed for such purposes, or they could be pumped into sealed railroad vans. There was also the use of Zyklon-B pellets in some later concentration camps to kill the inmates. The sick prisoners in the detention facilities were in most cases killed through the use of lethal injections. However, none of the above mentioned methods of killing people supplanted the number of prisoners who died as a result of fatal beatings, hangings and shootings.  

Concentration camp survivors
Despite the fact that there millions of people around the world who for one reason or the other can claim that life is very brutal, however, very few of their experiences if any, can compare to what the victims of the Nazis went through during the Holocaust era. Up and until these victims could either escape or die, their lives were characterized by intense constant suffering, mistreatment and fear. The Holocaust survivors constitute the first group of victims of genocide to be examined systematically. Having the chance of following the post war adjustment for the Holocaust survivors for six decades, has made it possible for the rest of mankind to understand clearly the lifelong consequences of such group and personal trauma.

The genocide survivors are completely transformed individuals. These people talk of having lived three distinct lives before, during and after the Holocaust period. These survivors have gone through shattering of all the basic assumptions of humans that is, there is safety in the world and that there are people who are ready to extend protection and care. The victims of the Holocaust genocide are filled with terrifying memories, which involuntarily in several occasions intrude through one way or another into their daily lives. The smells, sensations and sights connected with the past trauma they went through can be recalled vividly. Again, the genocide survivors hope to continue with their normal lives but the tragic experiences they went through during the period of the genocide never departs from them completely. With several tragic exceptions, these survivors are constantly seeking to gather the shattered bits and pieces of their lives before the genocide took place, and grafting the remnants in order to compose themselves in the post genocidal era. However, contrary to emotional trauma victims, who can easily bury and forget their evil encounters in the past, the genocide survivors remain more committed to the remembrance and memories of all their loved ones, whom they lost in the Holocaust.

The basic human dignity of the inmates imprisoned at the concentration camps was greatly abused by the Nazis and the prisoners did not have any human rights at all and they therefore lived at the mercy of the Nazis. The life of the prisoners in the camps was awful, they had to wake up everyday at half past four in the morning and a roll call was performed in order to determine whether all the prisoners were present at the facility. The prisoners were forced to go to work while wearing camp fatigues that were stripped, they were not allowed to put on under wears and they had to wear wooden shoes which were very uncomfortable especially because they could not put on socks. In most cases, they had to wear ill fitting pair of wooden shoes that made them to experience a lot of pain as they walked.

The prisoners had to work for more than twelve hours each day during the summer season while during winter they could work for slightly lesser time. They did not have any rest periods for any reason and they had to work throughout whether they were healthy or sick. During the periods of the roll calls, all the prisoners had to remain standing until all the roll call was over irrespective of the number of hours it would take or the prevailing weather conditions, especially if there was a missing inmate. Even though the prisoners at the camps performed tasks that were very difficult and energy consuming, they were only provided with bread and water rations which were hardly enough. As a result most the prisoners could become weak very fast and as well as being vulnerable to various illnesses, from which they could easily die. Everyday after roll calls, all the prisoners could be subjected to either collective or individual punishments. There was also constant torture in the camps and in most cases the prisoners could be punished or tortured while naked thus lowering their human dignity significantly.

The medical experiments which were normally performed on the prisoners by the Nazi doctors further lowered the human dignity of the prisoners. The doctors could carryout a wide range of experiments on the prisoners which were very dehumanizing to say the least. The doctors could test the X-rays efficacy as a device that can be used for sterilization by administering over doses to the female inmates. The doctors were also not only allowed but encouraged by the Nazis to perform some fatal experiments that could kill the prisoners in a lot of agony. The human dignity of the prisoners was also abused through the manner in which some of them were brutally murdered in the eyes of either their loved ones or other prisoners. The prisoners faced all forms of assault including physical and sexual assault where female inmates could be raped before their relatives and husbands as well as being made to stay naked for long periods of time even during cold weather conditions. The human dignity of the prisoners simply did not exist since they had no human rights at all.

Recognition and our responsibility
The last battles of the second global conflict in the theatre of the Europeans together with the surrender of the Germans occurred between the end of April and the start of May 1945. Towards the end of April 1945, the Allied military forces managed to close in Benito Mussolini in Milan, he was the Italian dictator, was captured by the partisans from Italy. At the time of his capture, Mussolini was attempting to flee from Italy and go to Switzerland. He was executed the following day following his capture together with other fascists who were captured together with him. On the closing day of the same month, fierce battle raged allover Berlin where the Nazis troops led by their leader, Hitler, were crashed. When Hitler finally realized that he had eventually lost the battle and was not willing to suffer the same fate as the Italian dictator, Mussolini, he opted to commit suicide while in his bunker he died along with his mistress, Eva Braun. Without Hitler, the Nazis of Germany were as good as defeated in the battle and they could hardly go on with the fighting.

Shortly after the death of the Nazi leader, the Germany forces had no alterative but to surrender. The Nazis first surrendered unconditionally in Italy their commander in chief and SS General agreed to stop the fighting in the country. Germany would soon surrender and stop its forces from fighting in all other regions where it had a lot of influence and occupied during the period of the second global conflict. Since the Nazis of Germany and their supporters and collaborators were the main players of the second global conflict, their defeat and eventual surrender marked the end of the conflict. However, the bomb that was dropped in Hiroshima, Japan is one of the major factors that brought to an end the WWII.

The Nuremberg trials comprised of a series of tribunals and trials that were most remarkable for prosecuting the outstanding members of the economic, political and military leadership of the regime of the Nazis following its defeat and surrender in the WWII. These trials and tribunals were mainly held in Germans Nuremberg city between 1945 and 1946 at the Justice Palace. Through these trials the world was in a position to give its verdict concerning the atrocities and humanitarian crisis that was brought about by the Nazis. One of the main objectives of the verdict that was given by the international community over the magnitude of the Holocaust genocide was to ensure that a repeat of the same did not take place ever again in history of mankind. The Nuremberg trials were done not only to punish the perpetrators of the genocide crimes during the Holocaust era, but also to deter other leaders and regimes with similar intentions from perpetrating such crimes and to aware that they will one day be made accountable for all the crimes humanitarian crimes they have committed.

For the individuals who were found guilty by the Nuremberg tribunals and trials, for crimes against humanity, they were sentenced to death through hanging. This is the most severe punishment which any individual can be put through. It was mainly meant to instill fear to the totalitarian leaders who use their positions to oppress others and commit several humanity crimes especially to the minority and their chief opponents. The punishment sentences that were passed by the Nuremberg tribunals and trials were final and the defendants could only appeal through them and not to any other courts of law anywhere in the world. Due to the fact that these were international tribunals, the sentence that was awarded was perceived to be the position of the world on matters concerning humanitarian crimes.

The anxiety age and the lost generation age were ages in which the world witnessed modern totalitarianism as well as well as fascism. By the end of the 1930s, the liberal democracies in Switzerland, Scandinavia, France and Britain were realities. However, in other places across the European continent, various forms of totalitarian dictators showed their really ugly faces and heads. Totalitarianism appeared to be the future wave and it swept across most parts of Europe, with devastating effects on its victims. In fact, the century belonged to the right according to Mussolini, the Italian dictator. Totalitarianism was full blown in the mid twentieth century and it was a real nightmare for the entire world and the individuality of the humans was actually subsumed below the might of the collectivism of totalitarianism. The totalitarian state was very swift at rejecting all the values believed to be liberal and instead exercised absolute control over virtually every aspect of the lives of those it governed.

The totalitarian leaders most of whom were from Europe such as Hitler of Germany, Mussolini of Italy and many other European leaders ruled their people by the sword. Several crimes humanity crimes were committed by the totalitarian leaders, especially on individuals who were in one way or the other opposed to their policies and methods of governance. To make matters worse, these leaders also looked for ways and means of exerting pressure on their neighbors to make them comply with this inhuman form of governance. There was very little if any human dignity and the subjects could be made by these regimes to go through terrible ordeals in the hands of these governments and their supporters and collaborators. People could be persecuted and murdered without trial and therefore no one in these nations lived a life in which he or she could enjoy all the human rights. To make matters worse, these regimes could invade other nations and force them to comply with their totalitarian principles. If the invaded governments were weak then its people were made to live under the brutal leadership of totalitarianism.

There are several crimes that have been committed in the history of mankind in which people have been made to go trough very severe ordeals. In more recent history, Iraqi people went through a very difficult time under the leadership of their former leader Saddam Hussein. People who were opposed to the leadership of this leader were persecuted and murdered in the open in order to make others fear. Women and young girls were raped and killed and no one in the country was allowed to oppose the regime of Hussein or they risked being persecuted. People in the country lived in constant fear, not knowing what their leader might do next since he ruled in a very brutal manner and no one was spared, not even his close allies who went against his will. It took the intervention of the United States and the entire international community to bring the situation in the country under control. Hussein was also accused of manufacturing weapons of mass destruction and the main target of these weapons is not yet known although it is largely believed to be the American government and its people.

Conclusion
It is in no doubt that the genocide that was perpetrated by the Nazis between 1933 and the end of WWII is one of the worst and most devastating experiences the world has ever experienced. Through the Nuremberg tribunals and trials, the international community attempted to give its verdict in order to ensure that a repeat of such horrific tragedy does not reoccur in future. This particular genocide is a great lesson to be learnt by all generations of mankind of how poor leadership, bad government policy and propaganda can mean to its victims. It is therefore very important for all the world leaders today and in the future to ensure that no other genocide of this or lesser magnitude ever takes place. In the recent history, there have been instances of poor leadership that has led to mass suffering of people resulting into a humanitarian crisis. The leadership of the former Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein is a good example where the Shias were discriminated against by his leadership which favored the Sunnis.

Men in Black How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America is a book which was authored by Mark Levin in 2005. The introduction of the book was written by Rush Limbaugh. Levin book was meant for people who actually want to understand the power grab and the constitution by the very institution which has been given the mandate and responsibility of interpreting it i.e. the Supreme Court. Levin is a conservative radio host and a frequent National Review contributor as well as a lawyer. He is also the president of Landmark Legal Foundation. He has authored many articles which have been published and have appeared on scores of radio and television programs. The objective of the author is to show the reader how the Supreme Court has made laws in the name of interpreting them. He also want to show the disparities that there are in the supreme court and how they have changed what the founding fathers of America dreamt for it because of their own personal and moral philosophies.

This book surveys a broad political landscape which has come to be littered with the handiwork of justices who have already forgotten their constitutional place. The author in this book has illustrated how the Supreme Court has gone beyond peoples right of privacy in sexual matters and has also interfered with laws of everything from restricting child pornography to immigration to war on terror. The most helpful chapters are those that the author has illustrated about Bush vs. Gore and why what the Supreme Court did should never be repeated again.

In his book he comes out firing against the United States Supreme Court. He accuses the Supreme Court of corrupting the ideals which were laid by America founding fathers. In his estimation he argues that the court pursues an activist agenda which is ideology based and thus they overstep their authority within the government. In order to support his view he examines several decisions that the court has made its history for instance the Marbury vs. Madison case in 1803 and Roe vs. Wade in 1973. The author has also devoted several chapters in key cases which have been culminating in modern issues such as the McCain- Feingold campaign reform bill and same sex marriage.

The author argues that the constitution is under siege by judicial activists who are obsessed on remaking America to reflect their moral and personal political philosophies. He argues that the liberal judges who see the constitution as a document which evolves with time are at odds with the Americas founding fathers vision of what they wanted the federal government to be. He refers to them as activist judges who make instead of interpreting the law. In his book Levin advocates for originalism, legal philosophy which is conservative hinging on a narrow interpretation of the constitutions text. He also contends that by moving judiciary to its original fold could thwart the power grab by radicals in the robe.

The author has also blasted affirmative action decisions. For instance he contends that the 14th Amendments equal protection clause should be sufficient enough to help combat all types of racial discrimination. Levin can be described as ardent advocate but his tone which is strident at times gets in the way of objective analyses of the systems flaws. Levin arguments sometimes hinder one from seeing the objective side of the story and thus one end up seeing it in a blurred vision thus hindering objectivity. The lasting contribution for this book is its commitment constitutionalism other than conservatism. It advocates for the right use of the constitution. What one cannot be able to tell is whether the founders will be appalled by the present Supreme Court as illustrated by Levin. What one can tell is that critics who are likeminded are likely to be galvanized by this call which has been documented by a conservatist.

Every book has its own strengths and shortcomings and thus Levins book does not surpass this. Like many attorneys would do, Levin did a thorough research on the issues that he writes about in his book and he therefore delivers his points with tremendous vigor. He excoriates the justices in instances he feels that strict constitutional constructivism gave away interpretation which was biased. There is no single point that is not illustrated with ample information. The problem with the book is that the definition of activism is inconsistent. For instance in the case of McCain-Feingold the court declined to rule on a bill which had already been passed by the congress and signed by the president. According to Levin the bill had violated the First Amendment but he still accuses them of activism even when they are passive.

Men in Black How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America by Levin has changed my way of thinking. I always thought that the courts are places where justice is adhered to in the correct form without biases. But after reading this book I have been able to understand how the Supreme Court carries out its responsibility. Sometimes it is filled with a lot of bias. Some times they have tried to interpret the law but instead of doing so they end up making other laws and thus end up making the wrong decisions in some cases. Most of the time is because they are led by their own political and moral standards.  I therefore tend to agree with Levin that originalism should be maintained and also the conservative interpretation of the constitution should also be maintained. The book has also shown how court imports laws from other countries so that they can be able to win the culture of the extremists.

This book can be described as a great read which helps the reader to have an excellent picture of the history of Supreme Court and the various supreme judges who presided over the court in the past. Whether one is liberal or conservative it is hard for the person to disagree with the points that the author has put across in this book. The book flows from the beginning to the end. The book is able to catch the attention of the reader and makes him or her to want to read more. The ideas are well interconnected and thus understanding it is very easy. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand clearly about the Supreme Court and their responsibility and so far how they have violated or overstepped their mandate.

In conclusion one can say that the court has failed in their proper role to balance and check the legislature and executive branches. Even though this book is about the judiciary we should not rail on activist judges but we should rail on against the legislature and the executives because they have failed in their duties to check and balance each other.

Criminal law and procedure is filled with many little ins and outs that determine how laws are executed.  One must pay careful attention to these intricacies or find later that erroneous mistakes have been made.  This cannot be truer than for that of members of law enforcement.  Officers are responsible for making judgments calls daily based on suspicions and facts in plain view.  These situations are termed as reasonable suspicions and probable cause.  They are very similar but very different when it comes to applying the law.  Understanding how each of these particulars works can be the deciding factor of evidence being admitted into court or an entire case being thrown out.
   
In a given scenario, two officers were patrolling an area known for its drug problems.  The officers on duty noticed a vehicle make an illegal turn, and they pulled it over.  There were three individuals inside the car, and the driver was observed by both officers bending down over his seat.  With the officers positioned on either side of the vehicle, they asked the driver about his suspicious action, but the driver denied having done it.  The officers asked the driver again and the driver suddenly had a case of amnesia and did not remember having done it.  The officers took all three people out of the car and searched the vehicle.  Upon doing so they found fifty grams of crack cocaine and ten thousand dollars in cash.  The crack cocaine was under the driver seat, and the cash was under the passenger seat.  The officers charged all three suspects with possession of crack cocaine.
   
The first two items to be considered in the aforementioned scenario are reasonable suspicion and probable cause.  Reasonable suspicion can determined by assessing as to whether or not a reasonable person would perceive that a crime was in progress, had been committed, or was about to take place (Nicholson, 2010).  In laymans terms, reasonable suspicion means that there is not enough evidence to perform a search of the person or property.  Probable cause is different in that there is enough evidence justifying a search of a person or property.  The United States Supreme Court defined probable cause as, the known facts and circumstances are sufficient to warrant a man of reasonable prudence in the belief that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found.

It is obvious that the officers were able to establish reasonable suspicion by the evasiveness of the drivers answers when asked two simple questions.  The level of reasonable suspicion was upgraded to probable cause when the officers realized that there could be a weapon or drugs under the drivers seat.  An officer is performing his legitimate function of duties in conducting a search of a person and property if he fears for his life.  This could have been the case in this scenario.
   
There are five steps that must be followed in establishing probable cause during a traffic stop.  The first step is pulling a vehicle over.  An officer cannot just stop a vehicle for no apparent reason.  There must have been a moving violation committed in order to establish a legitimate reason to stop the car.  Second, the officer must question the suspect.  If the subject seems unclear, confused, nervous, unable to make eye contact, or seems hostile, then the officer can declare probable cause and proceed with searching the individual and the car.  If the officer is still unsure, then he must move on to step three which is asking for consent to search.  An officer must ask for permission to search a car.  The suspect is well within their legal rights to refuse a search but once a suspect consents, he or she waives their Fourth Amendment rights (Nicholson, 2010).  Step four relates to a suspect refusing to give permission to search.  An officer has the right to temporarily detain a suspect in order to get a drug dog on the scene.  The United States Supreme Court determined that it is not unconstitutional for a drug dog to sniff the outer perimeter of a vehicle, nor does it require a search warrant.  If a drug dog sniffs out possible drugs, then probable cause is instituted and the search can be performed.  The fifth and final step in establishing probable cause is a full search with probable cause.  If a search is performed without probable cause being legitimately found, then any and all evidence seized will not be admissible in a court of law.
   
There are four questionable and problematic concerns with the way in which the officers handled the situation.  First, the officers never asked for consent to search the vehicle.  There was no mention of drug smelling aromas coming from the vehicle either.  Although the officers could argue in court that they suspected a weapon and feared for their life, it was still, nonetheless, a careless error on their part.  An officer must always ask for permission to search a vehicle when attempting to make a probable cause determination.  Secondly, the officers could have temporarily detained the suspects and asked headquarters to dispatch a canine unit to the scene.  Clearly, the canine unit would have been able to sniff out the crack cocaine from the outer perimeters of the vehicle without hesitation.

Third, the officers should have only charged the driver with possession of the crack cocaine since it was under his seat.  The passengers will be able to argue the fact in court that they had no knowledge of the drugs being under the seat.  Finally, all three of the suspects should have been charged with trafficking due to the large sum of money under the passenger seat of the car.  The large sum of money is a good indicator that someone in the vehicle is selling drugs.

Officers must use an extreme level of problem solving, quick thinking, and tact when performing traffic stops.  They must have a true understanding and grasp of the law as they are the beginning phase of many criminal court matters.  There is absolutely no room for error.  Reasonable suspicion is the first instinct in a possible crime scene and probable cause is the next step up.  Specific steps must be followed in order to establish the existence of probable cause in order to secure a good case in court.  The court system relies heavily on the professional conduct of members of law enforcement.  It also relies on the law being followed to the letter.  If an officer is going to do a job, then the job should be done right the first time around because the court does not allow do overs.

The Superfund program was established by Congress in 1980 with the sole aim of providing government financing into cleaning activities of highly contaminated waste sites in the United States. Initially, the funding for the program was from dedicated taxes sourced from the chemical feedstock, corporate income and petroleum industries. Such went directly to the trust fund meant to help the Environmental Protection Agency .This however lasted up to 1995 and henceforth, the fund dwindled gradually because it had to rely on other alternative sources of funding.  By the end of financial year 2003, the funds balance was down to zero.

Between 2004 and 2008, the Superfund program was entirely funded from the treasury using the taxpayers money (Ramseur et al, 2008).  This however attracted different reactions from congressmen and the public alike with quite a significant number of propositions requesting for the reinstatement of the dedicated taxes. The argument for this was that the cleanup funds should come directly from the petroleum and chemical industries because they were responsible for the leaks and spills that made the greatest percentage of hazardous materials in the targeted sites.

Ramseur et all (2008) however observes that opponents of the reinstatement argued that the dedicated taxes were not only unfair, but overreaching too. This was especially so because the taxes were imposed on all industry players regardless of whether they were compliant with set environment protection measures or not.

According to Hogue (2007), Superfund plays a critical role in short and long-tern clean-up activities through out the United States landscapes. By 2008 however, Superfunds budget request presented by the president to the appropriation committees in the house and senate were declined for all the years between financial years 2004 and 2008. In the same years, the programs spending needs exceeded the funds appropriated to the same b y Congress.

Available funding for the Superfund after the expiry of the dedicated tax program came from the following

Inter-fund transactions  These are funds that are advanced to the program from the treasury. The amounts advanced each financial year mainly rely on congressional appropriation. In the financial year 2009, the amount proposed was 1.26 billion. However, this proposed amount would depend on the ending balance that the fund would have at the end of financial year 2008. Money advanced from treasury is meant to cater for the funding balance that remains after the balance of FY2008 is subtracted from the proposed appropriation. The maximum level of funding enacted by congress would not be exceeded.

Cost recoveries these are payments made to the fund by private entities for the purpose of reimbursing the government for the cleanup activities. The compensation is however done by private parties who are legally responsible for dumping and other forms of pollution. Projecting the funds from cost recoveries cannot be done in advance because they vary from one year to another. This represents vagueness in the amount of funding that the program gets and consequently the nature of planning that can be done.  According to Ramseur and others (2008), cost recoveries between financial years 1997 and 2002 registered an average of 272 million a year. Between financial years 2003 and 2006, the average amount of cost recoveries drastically fell to 60 million a year. FY2007 was more promising with 234 million, while FY2008 and 2009 averaged 76 million.

Interests and profits Like all government owned trust funds, Superfund qualifies to earn interests on any balance it has in its account until such a time that the money is expended. The more the unexpended balance, the more interest the interest the fund earns. Due to the slow pace of some of the funds obligation, the fund can earn interests for longer. In the FY2008 for example, the fund had 2.9 billion, which was estimated to have earned the fund 151 million in interest. In FY 2009, the fund was also estimated to have earned 125million in interests.

Fines and Penalties Although this contributes only a small percentage of the monies that are needed in the Superfund program, it is still considered a supplementary source of revenue. The average collection from these fines and penalties average 1 million annually.

Cleaning the hazardous wastes in different sites is no mean feat. Agreeably, Superfund requires immense finances for it to accomplish its mandate. When the program was first initialized in 1980, there were 19,000 sites that needed cleaning (Habitch  Henry, 1986). These sites have grown over the years, thus raising the need for more funding.  Money in the fund cater for short-term and emergency cleanups under the removal program, long-term clean up under  the remedial program, program staff, site assessment activities before cleanup and program administration. Superfund also engages in environment related cleaning activities and this too costs money.

The projection of Superfunds funding needs indicate that the program will need more sources of funding as the days go by. First, the dumping sites are increasing at an alarming rate, meaning that the fund will need to work twice as hard. This of course will require more money.  Secondly, existing damp sites are moving from ordinary sites, to mega sites thus meaning that they will no longer require analysis or redesign by the fund. Rather, such will need Superfund to engage in remedial measures for the sites. Again, this will call for increased funding. On paper, the average cost of cleaning mega-sites is estimated as 50 million. In reality however, the clean up exercise is said to cost an average of 140 million.

In 2003, Superfunds remedial action program had a deficit of 175 million. As a result, 11 sites could not be attended to due to the shortfall. Five other sites requested for funding in the same year, but could not be provided for because there were no monies. The following year (2004), saw a repeat of the same. 19 sites that had been earmarked for construction were not constructed because, once again, there was no adequate funding.

Currently, EPA is given an approximate 1.2 billion by Congress each financial year.  This is however barely enough considering the immense work involved in the clean up activities. In view of this, the American recovery act 2009 gave a supplementary appropriation of 600 million dollar to Superfund to enhance its cleaning up activities. Of these funds, 582 million were allocated for the programs remedial actions, while 18million was set aside for use in headquarter and region activities.  9 million of the latter were held in reserve for use in future years, thus making the total amount advanced to the program 591 million.

The recovery act was cited as a way of promoting and protecting green jobs, while promoting a healthier environment by making cleanup activities on hazardous sites across the country possible.

Apart from the Act, Congress has realized the dwindling funds in the Funds accounts and the effect that this is having on the environment. As a result, the last three congresses have had bills introduced regarding increased government funding to the program or reinstatement of the Superfund tax. None of these debates have born much fruit.

In the Superfund State Contract, the program has a cost sharing agreement with states where remedial actions are carried out. The agreement requires a state to pay 10 percent cost of the total remedial actions. In the midst of the financial meltdown that hit most states beginning 2008 this requirement has been hard for the individual states. This meant that Superfund could only start projects which it could manage to complete without the 10 percent financial inputs from the beneficiary states.

The funding by congress is sometimes too stretched that EPA commences activities on some sites only to pause midway when the funds run out.  This poses more danger to the environment and human health than if the sites were left untouched.  To avoid such, EPA is encouraged by environmental analysts only to concentrate on high priority sites and handle the rest when funding is available. Congress too has been encouraged to consider supplementary funding to bail out EPA, when it is satisfied that the program has squeezed every dollar for the clean up exercises.

According to Porter (2007), EPA too has a responsibility of saving the superfund program some monies by revisiting sites that it has worked on before and determining whether new information or technology use can be employed to save the program some operating money.

In all this, and considering that Superfund has not been the recipient of enough government funding to meet its clean up obligations, Porter (2007) suggests that its time that EPA got a little creative in getting funding rather than relying entirely on government funding. One of the proposed ways is through partnering with local developers or other interest groups who might want to aid the program financially for purposes of making the environment better.  Brownfield sites can especially attract such goodwill from members of the public since they are valuable to communities once the cleanup is completed.

In addition to creative financing, Porter (2007) urges EPA to pursue joint venture between organizations and the program. A case in point is the joint army corps and EPA joint Urban Rivers Restoration Initiative.  This program brought together the Army corps, EPA and the state for purposes of restoring the qualities of water in eight contaminated urban rivers.

For now, it is apparent that Superfund is loosing the intensity which it started off with in the 1980s. Unfortunately, the pollution issues are not letting up, meaning that sooner or later a clean up strategy will have to be put in place. Since the program started listing sites for clean up, 1,579 sites have been placed on the Superfund cleaning list. By 2007, only 321 of these sites had been cleaned, rehabilitated and returned to the list. 712 more sites are classified as construction complete sites. Such classification means that such sites do not harbor tainted soils or toxic wastes any longer. As such, the program has installed pump-and-treat system, which eventually strips the sites off any remaining pollutants through ground water systems (Hogue, 2007). It is thus a matter of time before such sites are declared completely re-mediated and hence fit for human activity.

Most of the sites left in the Superfund list include closed-down smelters, mining sites, tanneries, landfills, military bases, energy department facilities and even river beds that have suffered pollution from industries located upstream. The clean up exercises are usually complex, time consuming and more so, fund intensive.

Conclusion
With the exception of 2009, when Superfund got a 600 million supplementary appropriation, the fund has been operating on a 1.2 billion budget since 2006.  The government has argued that this is enough money for Superfund to accomplish top priority cleanup activities that need to be done on pollution sites on annual bases.  As the government holds to its side of the argument, Superfund claimed that the funds only managed to move an average of 24 national priority list sites to the Construction completion status with such funding. Previously, the program managed to move an average of 42 sites annually. During the Clinton administration, congress funding to the Superfund program was more generous and statistics indicate that EPA was able to move an average of 79 sites annually to the construction Completion phase.

The reduced funding is clearly affecting the programs activities. Talk of reinstating the dedicated taxes is now rife, and even if the same does not succeed amidst the growing opposition, it is apparent that congress has realized the important role that Superfund plays in environment cleanup.  By 2007, Superfunds national priority list contained at least 110 sites, which were releasing toxic pollutants and human exposure to the same was not controlled.  This only means that Superfund can perform with additional funding and be able to neutralize the effects of such pollutants in the environment.

Any person who has ever applied for an admission in a prestigious college or job is well aware of the feelings people go through before knowing their fate. It is the same feeling the applicants at Harvard business school had and the opportunity was presented to them to know their fate by an anonymous hacker. The information on how to access the site was posted on the Business Week Online by anonymous hacker who gave out details on how to know the admission decisions which had been made by the school. Since the universities involved were using the same application software, accessing the site was made easier by just changing the end of applicants URL so as to get to the restricted site which contained the details of the application results. It took about 9 hours for the Apply Yourself programmers to rectify the security flow and this time was long enough for the curious students who wanted to know their fate.

(Q1).
If I happened to be among the MBA applicants who stumbled before the opportunity to learn the results early, I would have not even tempted to participate since the action was not the official way of checking the results. Secondly, owing to the competitiveness of getting admission in these schools, I would have thought that may be that was some trick to eliminate students who do not question their actions. This is because the school was still going to realize what happened and the people who took part in the whole process.

The act of hacking into the restricted site was termed as being seriously unethical and a break of trust that cannot be corrected by rationalization. Since Harvard University is a prestigious college, the administration felt that the students involved in the whole act did not qualify in terms of behavior to get admission into the college. Also according to the colleges mission, it is supposed to produce principled leaders who would make a difference in the world and the applicants involved in the whole act lacked the principles. The students are supposed to have skills and qualities, high integrity, second judgment and moral values of knowing what is right and wrong. Those who hacked the site were considered to lack such qualities and principles and therefore their admission was rejected. Through their action, the school showed the society the type of leaders they want to produce- ethically fit leaders.

(Q2).
Considering the morality of the applicants actions from the point of view of egoism, the applicants can be said to be morally right since their action was encouraging their long term interest. If the action was to result in a greater ratio of good to evil in the long run as compared to another alternative, then that was the right action to take. On the other hand, the act can be considered as being immoral since getting into the restricted area to check the application results was not in any way going to promote long term interests. The results they were going to get would not change anything in the long run. Choosing to wait was the best option and the applicants would have behaved like egoists since egoist believes that temporary sacrifice is required for the advancement in long term interests.

According to utilitarianism, the applicants action can be considered as being morally right if their actions would result in more good results over bad ones to the people affected by their actions. Utilitarianism states that before engaging into any action there is need to asses the consequences of that act on the people affected. If it consequences has more advantages as compared to its alternative, then the action should be performed.  When we apply this principle in this situation of applicants, then their action was immoral since it resulted in negative consequences which affected many people parents, other applicants, the administration, students body. Although their action was going to solve their anxiety, the results were bad and brought suffering to them.

On the ethical perspective, the applicants actions can be considered as being ethically right. According to Kants ethics, an action is considered morally right if and only if it can be made a universal law. Actions which occur as a result of feeling, partiality, or self interest are said to lack moral value. The applicants to the prestigious MBA programs did the wrong thing. Their actions were driven by self interest, they failed to consider their inspiration and that drive was not moral and was only serving their own benefit. According to Ross pluralism, the actions of the applicants are deemed as immoral. Ross states that we have several moral responsibilities which should not be reduced to the single obligation in order to increase happiness. The applicants had many important roles than knowing their application status early. The university was going to give them the results anyway.

The applicants action could be considered as being moral according to rule utilitarianism. This theory states that the standards should be applied to moral code as a whole but not to individual actions, since they adopt moral principles that guide individual action.

(Q3).
It was wrong for the MBA applicants to view their application files without authority. The whole act was wrong from the word go since that was not the official way of knowing the application results. They also knew that it was hacking and they still went ahead to check their results. Before engaging into the action, the applicants failed to asses the repercussions of their action since the university was still going to find out. There was a generational gap in this issue because the university still maintained their old fashioned way of disseminating information which the current generation has passed.

The Harvard school did not take long to make their next move known. The applicants who took part in the whole process were rejected. Where only a few students gained access to their files, systemic approach was adopted and no individualized decisions were made. Forty two applicants who had tried to know their results at Stanford were invited to explain themselves in form of writing. Later on, these students were also rejected for having failed to give satisfying reasons for their actions

(Q4)
Other people claimed that Harvard and other business schools overreacted to the whole thing.  I think the decision taken by Harvard school and other business schools was not excess since they believe that in business ethics is a priority. If they failed to take such a decision, these students would have believed that they did not commit any serious offence. If I was in the same situation I would have done the same. About 70 of MBA students supported the decision made by the school, but the undergraduate students were unconvinced. The hard line stance of Harvard school has made it media favorite (Felten, 2005).

(Q5).
One of the critics argued that the applicants who snooped were just engaging in the type of bold and aggressive behavior that makes for business success.  I tend to differ with this statement because business people should have morals and be honest. They should also be able to exercise some patience which these applicants lacked. Good leaders are those who take their time before taking any action to think about the consequences of their actions. Although what the applicants did was morally wrong, the university is to blame for having in place faulty procedures or not keeping their passwords secret. May be the hacking was done by somebody else who was not even one of the applicants but just wanted to be malicious (Felten, 2005).

(Q6).
The applicant failed to asses the consequences of his action but asserts that that should not be used to test whether he is moral or not. Of course it is a matter of ethics. A person may have integrity but may suffer from lapse of judgment and I think this was the case with this applicant. The applicants were overcome by the anxiety and failed to judge their actions and this does not mean that they lacked ethics.