C/D Blocks Social and Environmental Sciences - Today we will start the study of terrestrial systems by taking a close look at what is under our feet. Bedrock to clay and all of the organics we will examine soil and profiles of the forest foundation.
In geography, arable land (from Latin arare, to plough) is a form of agricultural land use, meaning land that can be used for growing crops. Of the earth's 57 million square miles (148,000,000 km²) of land, approximately 12 million square miles (31,000,000 km²) are arable; however, arable land is being lost at the rate of over 100,000 km² (38,610 square miles) per year. Our soils support 95 percent of all food production, and by 2060, our soils will be asked to give us as much food as we have consumed in the last 500 years. They filter our water. They are one of our most cost-effective reservoirs for sequestering carbon. They are our foundation for biodiversity. And they are vibrantly alive, teeming with 10,000 pounds of biological life in every acre. Yet in the last 150 years, we’ve lost half of the basic building block that makes soil productive. The societal and environmental costs of soil loss and degradation in the United States alone are now estimated to be as high as $85 billion every single year. Like any relationship, our living soil needs our tenderness. It’s time we changed everything we thought we knew about soil.
So today you'll look at arable land
Countries With The Most Arable Land In The World
Earth has lost a third of arable land in past 40 years, scientists say
Our World In Data Land Use
Soil: The Foundation of Agriculture
I'm sure you'll be doing some sciency things with Benton...with Ms. Nadeau we will start with a review of the Just Eat It film from last class and if you need more time for the worksheet..you can work on them now.
Before we go any further, What farming practices did you see in the film? We will move into Farming and watch the crash course video How Do We Produce Food?
Next, we'll check out this To eat or not to eat: 10 of the world's most controversial foods
Cool. Now we're going to get into groups and work on preparing for a 5 minute group presentation on an agriculture topic/issue. You may select one of the following: Cattle Ranching/Beef production; Soy; Coffee; Cocoa; or Avocado. Ms. Nadeau will take you to the Learning Commons for research today. Questions you MUST answer for your oral presentations:
- What is the crop and farming practice? Clearly describe the product and the methods.
- What are the benefits? Efficiency? Economic benefits?
- Describe places in the world where these methods are being used. Give clear examples.
- Who is producing the product ? Who (or what) is consuming the product? Who is profiting?
- What are the negative impacts or problems associated with these methods? Environmental? Land Use? Indigenous Groups? Human rights/health?
- What are your group member’s personal ethical judgments of this farming practice?
- Are there any initiatives or efforts to change these problems? Fair Trade?
Here is a list to start with:
Avocado
Cocoa
Coffee
Soy
Beef
A Block Criminology - Today we'll start with our look at property crimes, where we'll discuss the history of theft and make sense of the differences between occasional and professional thieves. You'll need to answer the following:
- What are the differences between a professional and an occasional thief?
- What is a "situational inducement"?
- What is a "Booster", a "Snitch", and a "Fence"?
After, You work for the Retail Council of Canada and have been hired to create a poster campaign about shoplifting. The poster campaign has two purposes:
- To help employees identify people who are shoplifting and
- To explain how to reduce shoplifting in stores (target hardening and target removal strategies)
Look at the bullet points on page 228-229 in the Criminology text for help. Here are some further ideas and points.....
Spot the Shoplifter: Unfortunately, there is no typical profile of a shoplifter. Thieves come in all ages, races and from various backgrounds. However, there are some signs that should signal a red flag for retailers. While the following characteristics don't necessarily mean guilt, retailers should keep a close eye on shoppers who exhibit the following:
- Spends more time watching the cashier or sales clerk than actually shopping.
- Wears bulky, heavy clothing during warm weather or coats when unnecessary.
- Walks with short or unnatural steps, which may indicate that they are concealing lifted items.
- Takes several items into dressing room and only leaves with one item.
- Seems nervous and possibly picks up random items with no interest.
- Frequently enters store and never makes a purchase.
- Enters dressing room or rest rooms with merchandise and exits with none.
- Large group entering the store at one time, especially juveniles. A member of the group causes a disturbance to distract sales staff.
"Stunning" look inside shoplifting epidemic (CTV News)
B Block Legal Studies - Today, you'll watch the Law & Order episode “Fools for Love”... From TV Tropes
Two teenage girls are found dead in an abandoned building. They are identified as Jane Kendrick and Annika Ohlman; Annika was an exchange student staying with Jane's family. Their deaths are linked to a suspect named Peter Williams. Jane's sister Laura, who had been caring for the girls, is feared to be another victim of Peter. She is found severely beaten in a hospital and says Williams was responsible. He denies harming Laura, who is in fact his girlfriend. Forensic evidence places Laura being present when Jane died, making her a key witness. With Peter about to walk free on bail, McCoy is forced to agree a plea deal giving Laura the minimum sentence if found guilty.
The episode is based on Karla Homolka. Her husband, Paul Bernardo was sentenced to life imprisonment for his part in the murder of Tammy Homolka (Karla's sister) and the kidnappings /murders of Kristin French and Leslie Mahaffey (Bernardo was classified as a ‘dangerous offender,’ meaning it is unlikely he will ever be set free). In exchange for pleading guilty to manslaughter and testifying against Bernardo, Karla Homolka accepted a ten-year plea bargain for her roles that was later upgraded to a twelve-year plea bargain – a far lighter sentence than many Canadians believed, and still believe, she deserved. Homolka was released on July 4, 2005, and originally opted to live under the name Karla Teale (Bernardo and Homolka had originally planned to change their surname to Teale, in honor of fictional killer Martin Thiel). For more news on Karla Homolka (who tried to change her name to Leanne Bordelais but now lives under her new name of Leanne Teale) check out the article at the Globe and Mail here...or The Toronto Star here or this CTV Montreal article.
You'll need to answer question 5 on page 175 of the All About Law text “Explain plea negotiation and outline the advantages and disadvantages of the process. In your opinion, is justice served by plea negotiations?”
To help, from the Department of Justice here in Canada: Broadly speaking, the promises that may be made by Crown counsel fall into three, overlapping categories: (1) promises relating to the nature of the charges to be laid (charge bargaining); (2) promises relating to the ultimate sentence that may be meted out by the court (sentence bargaining); and (3) promises relating to the facts that the Crown may bring to the attention of the trial judge (fact bargaining).
- Charge Bargaining
- Reduction of the charge to a lesser included offence;
- Withdrawal or stay of other charges or the promise not to proceed with other possible charges; or
- Promise not to charge friends or family of the defendant; or
- Promise to withdraw a charge in return for the defendant's undertaking to enter into a peace bond.
- Sentence Bargaining
- Promise to proceed summarily rather than by way of indictment;
- Promise to make a specific sentence recommendation;
- Promise not to oppose defence counsel's sentence recommendation;
- Promise to submit a joint sentencing submission;
- Promise not to appeal against sentence imposed at trial;
- Promise not to apply for a more severe penalty (for example, by not giving notice to seek a higher range of sentence based on the accused's previous conviction – s. 727 of the Criminal Code);
- Promise not to apply to the trial court for a finding that the accused is a dangerous offender (s. 753 of the Criminal Code) or a long–term offender (s. 753.1 of the Criminal Code);
- Promise to make a representation as to the place of imprisonment, type of treatment, etc.; or
- Promise to arrange the sentence hearing before a particular judge.
- Fact bargaining
- promise not to "volunteer" information detrimental to the accused during the sentencing hearing;
- promise not to mention a circumstance of the offence that may be interpreted by the judge as an aggravating factor (see, for example, the aggravating factors listed in s. 718.2(a) of the Criminal Code).
No comments:
Post a Comment