Abstract
This paper discusses the views of both gun advocates and gun eradicates. This paper is slightly biased towards the views of gun advocates and their fight to protect their "right to bear arms". However several key points are discussed in favor of those who wish to abolish our right to bear arms.

From the Paper
"The government has attempted to propose new gun regulations in order to decrease such crimes, violating the Bill of Rights. The 2nd amendment has protected the peoples right to bear arms for over 200 years, yet government policies are attempting to dismantle the ideas formed by our founding fathers to maintain a free democracy. They feel that depriving us of the right to possess firearms will solve all crime related issues. Contrary to their beliefs statistics and logic prove that firearms are the primary weapons against crime."

Tags:argumentation, civil, control, gun, rights

Abstract
Corporate greed and corruption has changed the face of American business forever. Corporate greed was the primary factor in the downfall of Enron, Global Crossing and MCI WorldCom. The paper shows that the governing bodies, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Senate, NASD and other powers that be decided to act and in 2002, the Senate introduced the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The paper describes how this new law impacts CPA's, CPA firms auditing public firms, publicly traded firms and their employees, lawyers, brokers, dealers, investment bankers and financial analysts who work for or have as clients as publicly traded companies. The paper looks at the mission and purpose of the law and examines its affect on the accounting industry.

Table of Contents:
Abstract
Executive Summary
Introduction
Purpose and Mission
What it does
The Effect of Sarbanes Oxley on the Accounting Profession
New Rules, New Practices

From the Paper
"In addition to the mandates outlined above, Sarbanes Oxley Act allows for additional provisions that seek to prevent conflicts of interests that can be a precursor to corporate corruption. The Act bans what is known as the "revolving door", prohibiting registered CPA firms from auditing any SEC registered client whose chief executive, CFO, controller or equivalent was on the audit team of the firm within the past year. This Act is crucial to help lessen the "you wash my back, and I'll wash yours mentality. Another significant rule calls for auditors to be rotated every 5 years. This way, no auditor can audit a client for more than five consecutive years."

Tags:SEC, PCAOB, Arthur, Andersen

Abstract
This paper explains how gun control is one of the most controversial topics in America, and this discussion is even spreading to other parts of the world. This paper summarizes one part of this international debate; specifically, it deals with the arguments against gun control. The paper presents three main arguments: The right to bear arms as guaranteed by the Constitution; There is little empirical evidence that gun control is an effective deterrent against crime; There is much empirical evidence that suggests that owning a gun can be a valid and efficient method of self-defense.

From the Paper
"The primary basis for many of the arguments against gun control is found in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which states that "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" (Encarta, 1999). However, the courts have never struck down a gun control law because of this provision. The federal government and all U.S. states have some gun control laws. These laws are based on several strategies: forbidding people who are considered to be unreliable from obtaining any firearms; prohibiting anyone other than the police, the military, and persons with special needs from acquiring high-risk guns (those that are particularly likely to be misused); and requiring waiting periods before purchasing a gun or gun license."

Tags:crime, defense, violence, constitution

Abstract
The criminal justice system here in the United States has traditionally operated under the premises of two fundamentally opposing goals. One goal is the crime control goal. This goal operates under the idea that criminals should be aggressively pursued and crimes aggressively punished. The other goal is the due process goal. This goal operates under the premise that the rights of the accused need to be carefully protected in any criminal justice investigation. This paper examines both of these positions, determining which one is the better goal for the United States to pursue, and why.

From the Paper
"Liberals have been the traditional defenders of the due process model (Perron). They are certainly operating under noble guidelines. The United States Constitution itself carefully lays out the rights of the accused in a series of amendments in the Bill of Rights. The Founding Fathers were obviously very concerned about protecting the rights of the accused, or these protections would not have been included in the Constitution. Should we as a nation follow any less stringent standards in dealing with our accused today? "

Tags:constitution, trial, jury, bill, of, rights, free, liberties, aggressive, criminal, police, profiling, raids, war, on, crime

Abstract
This paper paper briefly outlining the pros and cons of gun control, without taking either side.

From the Paper
"When you mention the issue of gun control, you will elicit a wide range of responses. Of those that care about the issue (and most people at least have an opinion), opinions are usually vehemently for or against increased gun control. There doesn't seem to be any middle ground. Those for increased measures to limit access to guns feel that to do so would limit a criminals access to guns, thereby reducing violent crime. Opponents of gun control refute this claim. Their reasoning is that making guns less available or harder to obtain will, in the end, only hurt the law abiding citizen."

Tags:guns, crime, violence, civil

Abstract
This essay concentrates on the events of 1975's consitutional crisis and whether or not Sir John Kerr exercised his reserve powers correctly. The paper includes an outline of a "direction of the future" showing how the reserve powers should be used in the future. In the 1975 supply crisis, some of Australia?s most controversial political decisions were made. The Governor-General (GG) of the time, John Kerr, made the decisions under the ?reserve powers?. Finally, a "direction of the future" is outlined on how the reserve powers should be used in the future.

From the Paper
"The Facts Under s53 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (1990), the Senate has the power to reject or defer budget appropriation bills (money bills), which are required for the ordinary annual services undertaken by the government . On 16 October 1975, the Senate passed a declaration moved by Liberal Senator Cotton . The declaration provided that the Government's money bills would not be passed until "the government agreed to submit itself to the judgment of the people". "

Tags:fraser, general, governor, john, kerr, malcolm, powers, reserve, s53, s57, senate, whitlam

Abstract
This paper looks at the current ability of the Australian legal system in protection of human rights. It includes an examination of the Constitution, High Court, Implied Rights, Common Law, The HREOC (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission), international law, and federal and state laws in Australia. The paper questions whether or not current protection is adequate, and whether a bill of rights is needed.

From the Paper
"Human rights refers to those rights described as "basic and essential to the existence of human beings". These include a range of rights such as the right to life, freedom and security of person; the right to free speech; the right to a fair trial. Pressure for a bill of rights in Australia has been considerable over the last 10 years due to increased awareness of existing laws and to their inability to protect human rights, uncertainty about the High Court and interpretations of implied rights, and embarrassing challenges to the existing Australian laws. The Australian legal system has to be examined closely in order to conclude whether human rights are adequately protected. There are many means of protection in the Australian legal system, yet the actual effectiveness has to be examined as to what extent "little protection" is offered. There are many arguments in favor of the introduction of a bill of rights, however, if this would actually be appropriate for Australia in protection of human rights, and if the need is warranted, needs to be looked at in greater detail."

Tags:religion, Theophaneous, Commonwealth, Racial, Discrimination, Act, HRC, Affirmative, Action, Agency

Abstract
This paper discusses the new anti-terror laws in Australia and how these impact Australian human rights. It examines what these new laws involve, what entrenching a Bill of Rights would involve and the possible outcomes of an entrenchment of the Australian Constitution. The author of the paper ultimately argues that a Bill of Rights is not necessary to protect the fundamental rights of the Australian people.

From the Paper
"If a Bill of Rights were introduced into Australia, judges would have ultimate power in deciding what actually constitutes human rights (Kerby 1995). Instead of the parliament and the elected politicians deciding on the rights of the people, this would be left to judges (Kerby, 1995). Some argue that this is giving them too much power. It is said that middle aged, upper class and predominantly white males cannot possibly know what is best for all demographics of the Australian nation and have no way in determining the will of the people (Kerby, 1995). Others also believe that judiciary's are unreliable as the sole determiners of human rights as a Constitutional Bill of Rights would enable them to establish their own political agendas (Gibbs, 2000). In addition, their decisions would no doubt be made on personal morals, views and beliefs (Gibbs, 2000). Also there would be an increase of power for those with wealth. By this it is meant that it would be the wealthy who could afford the legal action to achieve their agendas in how the bill was interpreted (Malcolm ,1998)."

Tags:judicial, liberties, power, ASIO

Abstract
This paper examines the debate over the subjectivity / objectivity of judicial decisions with some focus on the Australian High Court decision in Mabo and the predicament of the U.S. Supreme Court as a known activist court. The paper includes a diagram which explains the hierarchy of the judicial system.

Contents:
Announcing law: Judicial Interpretation
Mabo (No.2): The problem of negative activism
Pragmatism: an analogy to the U.S. Supreme Court
Bibliography

From the Paper
"The rule of law is axiomatic to modern liberalized democracies, on both a idealistic and utilitarian basis, undeniably vital to the stability of the judiciary . As a practical consideration it protects an individual's rights whilst forcing limitations on an institution's freedoms (including the executive government). As a philosophical touchstone of the judiciary, it enshrines some of the most intuitive and valued notions of justice and equality. Yet the concept of the rule of law, though much admired, is not infallible, at times frustrated (and even perverted) by competing legalist and normative interests."

Tags:activism, dworkin, positivism, subjective, subjectivity

Abstract
This paper argues that the inconsistencies within the Australian Constitution can be most effectively addressed through the process of reform. The paper begins with a discussion of the history and content of the Constitution. It then explains the ambiguities in the application of conventions, and the structure and roles of the Federal Parliament. The writer advocates that Australia's political, economic, cultural and social development need to be reflected in the Australian Constitution. The writer concludes that reforms are needed to bring the Constitution into a modern context, so that it is truly representative of the society that Australia is today.

From the Paper
"Many have argued that the Australian Constitution no longer performs this function effectively, and for this reason should be reformed. There are many ambiguities and inconsistencies in the role of the Constitution in today's society. These are apparent in the application of conventions, and the structure and roles of the Federal Parliament. The methods available to change the Constitution are limited, comprising mainly of referenda and High Court interpretations. Suggested areas of reform to bring the Constitution into the modern times include the implementation of a 'bill of rights' and a re-writing of the Constitution preamble. It is argued that the inconsistencies within the Australian Constitution can be most effectively addressed through the process of reform."

Tags:law, parliament, high, court, change, politics, Commonwealth