Informative or Persuasive Speech Presentation Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Informative Persuasive - Speech or Presentation Example They’ve been controversial since their start: People have protested being searched, saying, â€Å"I haven’t done anything wrong. Why on earth are you searching me?† They have been protesting the time it takes and the fact that the body scanner reveals†¦ well, a little more than they ever wanted to show. In the year 2009, airport body scanners were suggested as a way to increase airport security. The unsuccessful bombing on Christmas day was no doubt what scared many airport personnel and travelers in the United States into thinking that they were necessary. Forty scanners had already been purchased for ports around the United States. Some specific airports that had scanners by 2009 were the JFK airport, the Phoenix airport, and the LA airport. On New Years’ day, 2011, we knew that things would be changing for our nation. One of the things that changed was airport security: over 159 scanners have been purchased and are awaiting installment in various a irports. The question is: How would you feel about having someone rush over to you and say, â€Å"You’ve been called out of line. ... This is designed to ensure security, and to ensure nothing is being snuck in the airport. It does not portray a Two-D image of any sort. It does, however, create a three D scanner, which security personnel can use to see whether or not you are sneaking onto the airplane. Our second option is less complex. It’s called the â€Å"backscatter X-ray.† What it does is it takes a 2-D image of the front and back of the individual that is being scanned, and it creates and rotates that movement. The X-ray takes a 2-D image of the front and back of the person. It is much like an X-Ray technology. [Slide X shows the process that the airport scanners go through.] There are many pros to this technology, despite the protests about the scanner. For one, for instance, we are able to see what is being snuck across airplane borders. This is great, because not everyone is truthful with what they are taking across the borders. The airport technology will no doubt help prevent another attack such as September 11, 2011. These airport security scanners are designed to reveal everything under the clothes, preventing anyone from being able to sneak things through. It is able to show both metallic and non metallic weapons. It is also able to show guns, knives, plastic, explosives, and many other items. The body scanners reveal items that a simple pat down would miss. Many people protest the scanners because there are other options. â€Å"Why don’t you just pat me down?† They ask. However, a simple pat down can miss hidden objects, may be against regulations in some cultures, and are known for â€Å"being touching†, something many women have found to be inappropriate. Another alternative – dogs – can only help so much. Swabs can detect chemicals and explosives, but

The law of finding is characterised by many things but simplicity is Essay

The law of finding is characterised by many things but simplicity is not one of them - Essay Example providing some basic principles and guidelines for the determination of title to the finding of lost chattels.3 Even so, any clarification offered by Parker v British Airways Board has been blurred in light of the cases that followed it.4 Hoath goes on to suggest that the catalyst for the lack of clarity in and around the law of finding disputes is largely attributable to the lack of attention and recognition to this area of law. 5 At the end of the day the age-old maxim ‘finders-keepers’ is not all that straightforward. An obvious conflict arises between he maxim ‘finder-keepers’ and the concept that an owner or occupier of land retains all rights to property which is either in or attached to the land where the object is discovered. In an early case the maxim ‘finder-keepers’ was found to be subject to any claims by the rightful owner.6 In this case, Armory v. Delamirie (1722) 1 Str. 505 the land owner made no claim to an item of jewelry found by a chimney sweeps’ boy and the ensuing dispute arose between the boy and a jeweler.7 The modern rules of ‘finders-keepers’ is largely developed around the court’s findings in the case of Elwes v Brigg Gas Co. (1886) 33 Ch.D. 562. Chitty J made it abundantly clear that in finding disputes the critical question of property entitlement was dependant upon ownership and/or lawful possession of the property where the lost object was discovered. In this case a prehistoric boat which had been buried 6 feet deep in the earth on demised premises was discovered by lessee. Chitty J maintained that the owner of the demised property was entitled to possession of the object uncovered. Chitty J held: he was in possession of the ground, not merely of the surface, but of everything that lay beneath the surface down to the centre of the earth, and consequently in possession of the boat. . . . The plaintiff then, being thus in possession of the chattel, it follows that the property in the chattel was vested in him.