World History I Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

World History I - Essay Example However as we very well know, that situation is not true and Diamond (1997) presents some very interesting insights into how and why the development of societies took place as it did. The explanations given by him are quite interesting since they are logical and appear to make perfect sense. For instance, the argument about technology appeals considerably because today we live in a world which is very technology oriented and it is clear that countries which have taken modern technology to be an integral part of their economies have gained a lot from it. For example, in recent years both India and China have become economic giants mainly due to the investment in technology made by their respective governments and due to the technological contacts they have had with western powers like America and Europe. Of course the development of America is simply a result of the development of the European powers and their ability to create a food surplus from agriculture and domestication of animals. Diamond (1997) is correct when he says that African armies on rhinos and hippos could have decimated European cavalry charges but horses were domesticated while rhinos and hippos still remain wild and dangerous animals. The food surplus created by effective management and agriculture caused populations to expand which often meant that the chances of a region producing a thinker, inventor or discoverer were also increased. Additionally, the argument about human contact improving societies is very true since the contact between the Europeans, the Arabs, the Indians and the Chinese eventually took technologies like cartography, paper, numbers, and many other developments from one end of the globe to the other. The example of Australia in its relative isolation is quite correct since Australia did not know about these developments there was little chance of them developing these technologies on the same lines as the Eurasians. So the two fundamental

Liability & Use of Force Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Liability & Use of Force - Assignment Example Some state statutes actually necessitates that the other individual should have received the demand or request, and confirmation of commission about the overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. Examples of such crimes include solicitation of murder, prostitution or bribery. In other statutes, solicitation crime takes place right away the asking occurs despite of what the outcomes of such a deed are whether or not, the solicited individual was ready and capable to conduct the offense or not. States do have specific solicitation statutes as well as general solicitation statutes, such as obstruction of justice solicitation (Ross, 2012). A number of statures require specific corroboration necessity under general solicitation. A case in point is the Texas penal code section 15.03(b) which defines that any individual cannot be convicted under such section based on uncorroborated testimony of the individual purportedly solicited evidence (Gardner & Anderson, 2011). Two options are used w hen trying to prove that a defendant is guilty of solicitation crime. Firstly, there is the provision of corroboration only a single witness plus corroborating evidence. Second, corroboration is provided by two witnesses, in addition to the corroborating evidence. Thus, under a solicitation crime, the corroborating evidence needs to link crime commission to the accused. That is why it is independent from witness confirmation facts. It may comprise acts, behavior, statements, as well as other circumstances that display a link of the defendant to the stated crime (Singer & La Fond, 2010). Question 2 Conspiracy is substantiated when there is an accord to perform any illegal act. However, majority of the federal statutes necessitate that one of the co-conspirators should have commit an overt deed, such as assassination, abduction, defrauding of the government, or else commit a breach of a person civil rights in furthering the intentions of the conspiracy (Gardner & Anderson, 2011). Furt hermore, there is no much consideration concerning which one of the supposed co-conspirators performed the overt act.   Thus, it need not be a criminal deed, but just a single overt deed is sufficient to establish the reality of the conspiracy (Gaines & Miller, 2012). The reason being that without an overt action, it is not legally sufficient to validate that the said crime was performed with the declarant being conscious of the present conspiracy, and went further to get  connected to such a crime intentionally. The rationalization is that the declarant collaborated positively inside the action, or just offered an agreement to collaborate, and which does not substantiate that they participated in the crime (Gardner & Anderson, 2011).   Notably, the overt act cannot be brought against the other suspected co-conspirators, when it was not wished to further the broader intentions of the conspiracy. Nevertheless, it qualifies when both clandestinely planned to further the particip ant own individual purpose.   Moreover, the overt act need not be a subsequent autonomous act which follows the structure of the conspiracy. When it comes to multiple conspiracies, the defendant can be linked to different conspiracy, and the co-conspirator is the only individual permitted to tender