The Tea Act was passed by parliament that led to a famous event where colonists dressed up as Native Americans and committed acts of vandalism and destruction.
Tea act is one of the intolerable acts that preceded the American Revolution. In the history of the British American colonies, Lord North's legislative maneuver was used by the British ministry to legalize the sale of English tea in the country.
All Townshend Acts charges were removed in 1770, averting a prior crisis. The only duty left was only tea, which since that peridd has been mostly imported into the Colonies by Dutch smugglers.
The Tea Act changed excise laws so that the financially precarious British East India Company could pay the Townshend duty and still shortchange its rivals in order to help it sell the 17,000,000 pounds of tea it had stored in England.
To know more about Tea Act, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/5567830
#SPJ4
What were the results of Mendel's experiment ?
He proved that qualities are reliably passed on from parents to children in dominant and recessive patterns, regardless of other traits.
Although Gregor Mendel's rules serve as the theoretical foundation for our knowledge of the genetics of heredity, genetic analysis precedes Mendel.
Mendel contributed two new ideas to the field of genetics:
created clean lines
kept statistics notes and counted his findings
The gene for tall plants was dominant in Mendel's trials, whereas the allele for short plants was recessive. Similar to this, the dominant gene for yellow seeds outweighed the recessive allele for green seeds.
Mendel's second law was developed as a consequence of his second series of experiments. The law of independent assortment is this. It claims that the determinants of certain attributes are inherited separately from one another.
The law of segregation states that each gamete (egg or sperm cell) that an organism produces receives only one of the two gene copies that are present in the organism, and that the distribution of the gene copies is random.
For more questions on Mendel's conclusion
https://brainly.com/question/30097040
#SPJ4
In cases where informed decision makers such as trained medical staff or governmental officials agree that a research study has the potential to benefit a large number of people, written informed consent from participants is not needed.
The correct answer is False. Written informed permission from participants is not necessary when knowledgeable decision makers, such as skilled medical personnel or government authorities, concur that a research project has the potential to be helpful to many people.
A fundamental tenet of research ethics is informed consent. Its goal is to ensure that human participants can enter research freely (voluntarily), that they are fully informed of what it means to participate, and that they provide consent before entering the study.
Respect for people demands that subjects be given the option to decide what will or won't happen to them, to the extent that they are capable. When appropriate criteria for informed consent are met, this option is granted.
Read more about decision makers at
https://brainly.com/question/29035403
#SPJ4
More than half of women who are murdered are killed by a partner or family member. True or False?
True, More than half of women who are murdered are killed by a partner or family member, as per a study from United Nations.
Research shows that female victims tend to be younger than perpetrators in the United States, and domestic violence is more common in couples where the male partner is at least 15 years older than the female partner.
The United Nations also said sex workers were the group most likely to be killed, with rates in the United States about 18 times higher than non-sex workers.
The Drug and Crime Control Service stresses that legislative change and early intervention can help victims of domestic violence before it's too late, and can also train criminal justice system staff.
To learn more about ‘United Nations’, here:
https://brainly.com/question/15152811
#SPJ4
cases involving citizens from two different states would be heard in a:
Answer:
The Federal Court
Explanation:
Why did Churchill warn against the Munich Pact?
Churchill warned against the Munich Pact as believed that it would soon lead to Germany gaining more territories and might lead to another war.
He called it a complete and unmitigated defeat.
It became clear by 1936 that Hitler's had greater plans to expand Germany's boundaries, especially when his troops entered the Rhineland.
He soon annexed Austria only two years later, in March 1938.
Neville Chamberlain, while at the Munich Conference in 1939, agreed that Germany could gain the laid of Sudetenland, thereby seemingly averting any was in near future.
This was called the Munich Agreement.
However, Winston Churchill, one of the few critics of the appeasement policy, boldly described it as ‘an unmitigated disaster’. He however fell out of public support and very few agreed with him.
Finally his prophecy seemed to have come true. Hitler violated the Munich Agreement, March 1939, by occupying the rest of Czechoslovakia.
Soon, only six months later, Germany invaded Poland and Britain found itself at war, once again.
To know more about Munich Pact, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/29770761
#SPJ4
What did William Blackstone believe the purpose of law was?
The purpose of Blackstone's commentary on England law was to provide a readable source of common law for most people.
This work was divided into his four volumes:
Human rights, property rights, private and public wrongs.
One of his core beliefs is that laws are designed to protect the innocent, not to convict the guilty. Blackstone thus worked for a law firm that did not plead guilty to defendants.
Another of William Blackstone's beliefs was that citizens had certain rights that they could exercise against what they considered government excesses, including freedom of the press.
William Blackstone's third great belief was that all laws come from God, or at least from the natural order of the universe.
To learn more about 'William Blackstone', here:
https://brainly.com/question/30133256
#SPJ4
What are Mendel's 4 hypothesis?
The first of Mendel's four postulates and laws of inheritance is the principle of paired factors. The second is the principle of dominance. The third is the law of segregation or the law of purity of gametes, while the fourth is the law of independent assortment
Principles of Paired Factors: Postulate I
A character in an organism (diploid) is represented by at least two components. The two components are located at the same locus on the two homologous chromosomes. They might be a different or same representation of the same character. Alleles or allelomorphs are factors that indicate the same or alternate version of a character.
Postulate II. Dominance Principle:
The traits that occur in the hybrids of the F1 generation are always the dominant characters, and those that do not present in F1 progeny are always the recessive characters when two homozygous individuals with one or more sets of opposing characters are crossed.
Postulate III. Mendel's First Law of Inheritance, often known as the Law of Segregation or Law of Purity of Gametes:
When gametogenesis (the formation of gametes) or sporogenesis (the formation of spores), the two factors (alleles) of a trait that remain together in an individual, are randomly distributed to different gametes and then paired again in different offspring according to the probability principle, they maintain their identity and remain distinct. The law of segregation is sometimes referred to as the "law of purity of gametes" because two alleles remain together in their original, unaltered state without interacting, influencing, or combining.
Law of Independent Assortment (also known as Mendel's Second Law of Inheritance) Postulate IV:
Mendel considered two pairs of opposing characteristics and examined their inheritance after being pleased with monohybrid crossings (i.e., di-hybrid cross).
This law states that "the two components (genes) of each opposing character (trait) at the moment of gamete development assort or separate independently of the factors of other characters and become arbitrarily rearranged in the offspring."
For more questions on Mendel's conclusion
https://brainly.com/question/30097040
#SPJ4
a successful defense releases the defendant from partial or full liability for a tortious act.
a. true
b. false
A successful defense absolves the defendant of partial or total liability for a tortious act committed.
A term used to describe tortious behavior. Tortious behavior is thus defined as any behavior (other than breach of contract) that can be sued for as a civil wrong. Tort liability means that someone is held responsible for wrongdoing (other than under contract.). Torts are associated with civil court claims. It is a branch of English common law intended to right a wrong (violation of common law, social norms, or civil law) without resorting to criminal punishment. Tortious liability is the liability of the state for the tortious acts of its servants. Tortious liability is the liability of the state for the acts of omission and commission, voluntary or involuntary, and brings it before a court of law.
Learn more about tortious here:
https://brainly.com/question/29312384
#SPJ4
Assuming two degrees of freedom, which of the following is the correct interpretation of the chi-square analysis, using a p-value of 0.05
The null hypothesis should be rejected because the critical value is less than the calculated Value correct interpretation of the chi square analysis using a p value of 0.05
A chi-square test is defined as a statistically significant difference between the expected and observed frequencies.
The chi-square test uses hypothetical facts to determine significant differences between calculated and observed frequencies.
The null hypothesis is rejected because the squared value is less than the first found statistic or calculated value. Therefore the hypothesis is invalid.
To learn more about ‘null hypothesis’, here:
https://brainly.com/question/28920252
#SPJ4
Complete Question:
A researcher observed that when two heterozygous plants with red flowers are crossed the resulting offspring include plants with red white or pink flower. The researcher proposes the null hypothesis that flower color is the result of independent assortment and incomplete dominance. The researcher calculates a chi square value of 7.3. Assuming two degrees of freedom which of the following is the correct interpretation of the chi square analysis using a p value of 0.05?
A harh drought killed ome of the farm family’ corn and everal head of it cattle. Where on the production poibilitie curve could you poition a point to reflect thee circumtance?
A harsh drought killed some of the farm family’s corn and several head of it cattle. So, on the inside of the production possibilities curve you could poition a point in order to reflect these circumtances.
The production possibilities curve (PPC) is considered to be a graph which tends to show all of the different combinations of the output that can be produced when given the current resources and technology.
However, in order to reflect such circumtances, you could poition a point on the inside of the production poibilities curve. Thus, the slope of the production possibility curve is considered to be the marginal opportunity cost.Hence, the production possibility curve is concave to the origin.
To learn more about the production possibilities curve (PPC) here:
https://brainly.com/question/28289494
#SPJ4
First offenders may be jailed for at least 48 hours, can be fined up to $1,000 dollars, restricted to driving to and from work or to and from an alcohol treatment program, ordered by the court to attend either a three month or six month alcohol treatment program, required to file proof of insurance with the Department of Motor Vehicles, and required to have an ignition interlock device (IID) installed on his or her vehicle. In total, these fines and fees can exceed $5,000
First the offenders may be jailed for at least 48 hours. This is said to be ordered by the court in order to attend either a three month or the six month alcohol treatment program.
The alcohol treatment programs tend to guide the former user which is through a safe and effective medical detox, so, this is followed by counseling that tends to target the reasons behind the addiction.
However, the overcoming an alcohol addiction tends to start with a qualified treatment center that is said to help and also address the underlying and the co-occurring disorders. Then, the offenders are jailed for at least 48 hours.
Hence, the treatment centers must be well equipped to help the users.
To learn more about the counseling here:
https://brainly.com/question/28145933
#SPJ4
On the question of whether american laws applied to the overseas territory acquired in the spanish-american war, the supreme court ruled in the insular cases that?
The supreme court ruled in the insula cases that the American Constitution and laws did not apply to US colonies on the issue of whether American laws applied to the foreign territory won in the Spanish-American War.
The United States Constitution established the country's national government, established its core laws, and provided its citizens with a number of essential rights. Delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia and Baltimore agreed on September 17, 1787, that the Bill of Rights solely applied to the federal government and not to any state governments. The Supreme Court continued to hold in United States v. Cruikshank (1876) that the First and Second Amendments did not extend to state governments even after the Fourteenth Amendment had been ratified.
Read more about supreme court at
https://brainly.com/question/8856072
#SPJ4
if Liz Marley acquired a rare stamp as a bequest when her father passed away does it have the same basis
The stamp would have the same basis if Liz acquired it as a bequest from her father when he passed.
What is a bequest?Objects left in a will are known as bequests. In the past, bequest and deviser were terms used to describe real and personal property that was left by will. These days, both terms are utilized. The verb form of the action of bequeathing is called "to bequeath."
Gifts are not always bequests, but bequests are gifts. Making a gift through a will to a close family member is known as a bequest. In a Will, you may write something as straightforward as "I leave my red Corvette to my son." But a gift may also be given without regard to a will.
Read more on bequest here:https://brainly.com/question/14073669
#SPJ1
All of the following are true of the federal tax advantages of a qualified plan EXCEPT: O At distribution, all amounts received by the employee are free of taxes. O Individually owned non-qualified annuities are generally taxed as follows: O Premiums are not deductible; interest credited to the cash value is taxed deferred.
Answer:
O At distribution, all amounts received by the employee are free of taxes.
How did city infrastructure in the early 20th century affect the modernization of firefighters? (Check all that
apply.)
AThe training for firefighting opened more job opportunities.
B The city became the main overseer of all firefighting duties and jurisdictions.
CTechnology changes brought improvements to fire engines.
DWater hydrants and reservoirs were planned with the city's development.
Answer: all of them apply
Explanation:
In no less than 50 sentences, write down a three-paragraph essay on: “CAN POLICE BRUTALITY EVER BE JUSTIFIED?”
I. Introduction
Definition of police brutalityThesis statement: While there may be some circumstances in which police officers are justified in using force, police brutality is never acceptable and can never be fully justified.II. Background information on police brutality
Statistics on the prevalence of police brutalityExamples of high-profile cases of police brutalityIII. Arguments for the justification of police brutality
Situations in which police officers may feel threatened or justified in using forceThe need for police officers to protect themselves and the publicIV. Rebuttal of arguments for the justification of police brutality
Police officers are trained to de-escalate situations and use appropriate levels of forceThe use of excessive force often leads to further escalation and violencePolice officers should be held to a higher standard of conduct and be held accountable for their actionsV. Alternatives to the use of force by police officers
Community policing and restorative justice approachesThe use of non-lethal weapons and de-escalation techniquesVI. Conclusion
The use of police brutality is never justified and must be actively addressed and preventedThe need for reforms and accountability to ensure that all members of the community are treated with dignity and respect.what type of court has original jurisdiction over a case involving an american suing a citizen of another contry
Federal courts are the courts of primary jurisdiction in cases where Americans are suing citizens of other countries.
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. This means that federal courts can hear only cases authorized by the U.S.
Constitution or federal law.
The federal district courts are the point of contact for all litigation arising under federal law, the Constitution, or international treaties. This form of jurisdiction is called an "original jurisdiction".
The jurisdiction of the state courts may overlap with the jurisdiction of the federal courts, which means that in some cases both courts will hear the case.
Jurisdiction of the courts includes cases of the United States government, constitutional law, federal law, and interstate disputes.
Therefore, jurisdiction of origin also exists when an American is suing a citizen of another country.
To learn more about ‘Federal court’, here:
https://brainly.com/question/1384353
#SPJ4
Can the U.S. citizenship be taken away?
Denaturalization is only possible in cases when a person obtained citizenship fraudulently or incorrectly when they were not qualified. To denaturalize a citizen, the federal government may file a civil or criminal case in federal court.
A citizen who loses their citizenship is not always forced to leave the United States. Instead, unless there are grounds for removal, they will return to their prior legal status in the United States. However, if they applied for family members to immigrate to the U.S. based on their citizenship, such family members may be deported unless they had a different reason for being in the country legally. This is due to the fact that denaturalization implies that the person never really possessed citizenship.
To know more about Denaturalization click on the below link:
https://brainly.com/question/1578776
#SPJ4
what are the cybersecurity terms used to describe the two types of insider threats?
The cybersecurity terms used to describe the two types of insider threats are careless users and malicious users.
Careless users – Individuals who create entry points or mishandle data due to failure of security measures or failure of judgment regarding data policies and practices.
An unwary user can put themselves at risk and pose a threat by clicking a link in an email or granting network access.
Less dramatically, but perhaps more generally, careless users can increase risk from simple mistakes like: B. Bypassing security procedures in the normal course of business.
Malicious User – An individual who has or has had valid access to a system and uses it intentionally to steal or misuse data
A malicious user could be someone who is angry and seeking revenge, or someone who is greedily motivated to steal information in order to make money.
Since these users are insiders, they may know how to hide their tracks, which can make detection difficult.
To learn more about 'Cybersecurity', here:
https://brainly.com/question/24856293?
#SPJ4
There are two options for question 4, choose one question to answer.
What is Sociology?
What is Social structure?
What is the difference between the Gallup Poll and their survey on crime and the Justice Department survey on crime?
Create a diagram/matrix labeling both horizontal and and vertical structures and your place within it. (2 points) OR
Sociologist C. Wright Mills emphasized that social structure lies at the root of private troubles, and that what people may define as private troubles may be more accurately described as public issues, if these problems affect large number. What personal troubles have you encountered that may also be public issues? (2 points)
Helppp pleaseeee
Answer:
1. Sociology is the scientific study of society, including patterns of social relationships, social interaction, and culture. It focuses on the social, cultural, and political factors that shape and influence human behavior and societies.
2. Social structure refers to the organized patterns of relationships within a society. It includes the social institutions, norms, and values that shape and influence the behavior of individuals and groups within society.
3. The Gallup Poll is a public opinion polling organization that conducts surveys on a wide range of topics, including crime. The Justice Department survey on crime is a statistical survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice that collects data on crime and criminal justice in the United States. One key difference between the two surveys is that the Gallup Poll is a private organization, while the Justice Department survey is conducted by a government agency. Additionally, the Gallup Poll may use different methods and sample sizes than the Justice Department survey, which could result in different findings and conclusions.
I can't do the diagram for you.
Personal troubles that I have encountered that may also be public issues:
Lack of access to affordable healthcare: I have struggled to afford healthcare for myself and my family, and I know that this is a problem faced by many people in my community and beyond. This is a public issue because it affects a large number of people and has implications for public health and the overall well-being of our society.
Housing insecurity: I have struggled to afford stable and secure housing at times in my life, and I know that this is a problem faced by many people in my community. Housing insecurity is a public issue because it affects a large number of people and has implications for economic stability, social mobility, and overall well-being.
What is Thoreau's main point in civil disobedience?
Thoreau's main point in Civil Disobedience was that one should be free to exercise his/her self conscience in the political sphere of his country.
Thoreau goes on to say that he/she and should not be a silent spectator to the wrong doings of the government and should boldly voice their resistance to it.
The basic premise of Thoreau In Civil Disobedience is that there exists a higher law than the civil law which demands the obedience of the individual.
He argues that both the government and the humans are subordinate.
Whenever one takes the inferior position and the other becomes subordinate, it is important that humans use their conscience whenever such a case arises. This would in turn lead to the well being of the society.
To know more about civil disobedience, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/28342895
#SPJ4
Can the Supreme Court overturn a law passed by Congress?
Although the Court lacks the specific power to void legislation, this power was established by the well-known Marbury v. Madison decision.
The United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has the authority to conduct judicial reviews. This means that every act of Congress may be contested and brought before a Federal Court in a standard legal proceeding. The Justices may look over and interpret the act when the case comes before SCOUTS. Judicial review is the process through which the courts of a country determine whether the legislative, executive, and administrative branches of the government are carrying out their duties in conformity with the constitution. Everything that is seen to be against the Constitution is ruled void and invalid.
Click here to know more about legislative:
brainly.com/question/15522014
#SPJ4
Sociologist C. Wright Mills emphasized that social structure lies at the root of private troubles, and that what people may define as private troubles may be more accurately described as public issues, if these problems affect large number. What personal troubles have you encountered that may also be public issues?
Answer:
One personal trouble I have encountered that may also be a public issue is the increasing cost of healthcare. Even with health insurance, many people are struggling to pay for necessary medical treatments due to rising costs. This issue affects a large number of people, making it a public issue.
Explanation:
What does Thoreau compare government to in civil disobedience?
Thoreau compare government to in civil disobedience to a machine.
Thoreau makes a comparison between the government to a machine to explain how governments is devoid of any humane or moral values. It dehumanizes individuals.
He further elaborates his point by stating that Thoreau claims that the machines are the 'mass of men'. On the other hand "with their bodies"; they "put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones."
By using this words that correspond to parts of different machines, he explains how the government exploits the people to fulfill his means is that by serving the state.
In this way, the government no longer fulfills its functions of a welfare state and does little for the betterment.
To know more about Civil disobedience, click here
https://brainly.com/question/28342895
#SPJ4
Which of these is NOT one of the most common five ethical breaches you will see as a leader?
Bullying is not one of the most common ethical breaches one will see as a leader. The Option D is correct.
What does an ethical breach mean?An ethical breach occurs when someone within a system or community makes an ethical decision that sets a precedent for others to follow. The danger of ethical breaches is that they represent a fundamental shift in your organization's ethics.
Some examples of ethical breach include discrimination, safety violations, poor working conditions, and leaking confidential information. Bribery, forgery, and theft, while certainly unethical, cross over into criminal activity and are frequently dealt with outside the company.
Missing options "misusing company time counterfeiting theft bullying"
Read more about ethical breach
brainly.com/question/14864299
#SPJ1
The United States taxes each barrel of imported oil at a flat rate. This is
a. an antidumping duty.
b. a dumping duty.
c. a quota.
d. a tariff.
What is another name for federal and state laws?
Another name for federal and state laws is regulation, which means any applicable requirement imposed by any federal, state, or other law or regulation.
Federal law applies to all states in the United States, but state law is specific to a particular state. This means that state laws can vary from state to state.
So while you can do something legal in one state, the same act can face serious consequences in other states.
State law talks about the basics of right and wrong, while federal law addresses broader issues such as civil rights, criminal law, and immigration law. Both state and federal law are blanket issues, so there are conflicting situations.
To learn more about ‘federal law’, here:
https://brainly.com/question/14867447
#SPJ4
Common Law is a term for the laws that are familiar to most of us.
True/False.
Common Law refers to the laws that most of us are familiar with. False.
Common Law is derived from custom or judicial decisions in English and American courts, but it is not the result of legislation. Higher court decisions are not binding on lower courts.
In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and other quasi-judicial tribunals through written opinions.
The fact that common law emerges as precedent is what sets it apart. To synthesize the legal principles of previous cases, common law courts look to previous court decisions.The principle of stare decisis, which states that cases should be decided in accordance with consistent principled rules so that similar facts yield similar results, is at the heart of all common law systems.
Learn more about Common Law to visit this link
https://brainly.com/question/13070537
#SPJ4
Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the American jury system
The American jury system has several strengths. It allows ordinary citizens to participate in the administration of justice, which can increase public trust in the legal system. Juries also provide a check on the power of the government and the courts, as they are able to acquit defendants who are not guilty, even if the prosecution has presented a strong case.
WEAKNESSES:However, the American jury system also has some weaknesses. One concern is that jurors may not always be fully informed or capable of understanding the complex legal issues that are presented in court. In addition, the process of selecting jurors can be biased, as it is often based on factors such as race, gender, and socio-economic status. Finally, the jury system can be slow and expensive, as it requires the selection and convening of a group of jurors for each trial.
HOPE IT HELPS!The Court Packing Plan was an attempt by President Roosevelt to expand the number of justices to the supreme court. The expansion of justices however would only take place if the justices had the same views as Roosevelt thus assisting him with passing his own agenda. The New Deal were a series of program by Roosevelt to bring about economic growth after the stock market crash. Much of these provisions however were decided in the supreme court which provide motivation to Roosevelt to Pack the Court. Much of the New Deal faced challenges and many of the justice department officials opposed the legislature. Roosevelt issued a proposal stating that any judge over 70 should retire with full pay thus leading the way to a majority vote. Both sides congress opposed the court packing plan that Roosevelt presented.
The Court Packing Plan was an attempt by the President Roosevelt in order to expand the number of justices to the Supreme Court.
There was a bill which came to be known as Roosevelt's "Court-Packing Plan", which is a phrase coined by the Edward Rumely. In November 1936, President Roosevelt was said to have won a sweeping re-election victory. So, he proposed to reorganize the federal judiciary.
However, this act was done by adding a new justice each time a justice reached age 70 and failed to retire. Thus, during his 12 years in office, Roosevelt appointed 8 new members of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Hence, Roosevelt decided in order to curb the power of the Supreme Court.
To learn more about the Court-Packing Plan here:
https://brainly.com/question/3950000
#SPJ4