What are the difference between government and governance?

Answer:

Article 2 protects your right to life

Article 2 of the Human Rights Act protects your right to life.

This means that nobody, including the Government, can try to end your life. It also means the Government should take appropriate measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect you and, in some circumstances, by taking steps to protect you if your life is at risk.

Public authorities should also consider your right to life when making decisions that might put you in danger or that affect your life expectancy.

If a member of your family dies in circumstances that involve the state, you may have the right to an investigation. The state is also required to investigate suspicious deaths and deaths in custody.

The courts have decided that the right to life does not include a right to die.

Separately, Protocol 13, Article 1 of the Human Rights Act makes the death penalty illegal in the UK.

Are there any restrictions to this right?

Article 2 is often referred to as an ‘absolute right’. These are rights that can never be interfered with by the state. There are situations, however, when it does not apply.

For example, a person’s right to life is not breached if they die when a public authority (such as the police) uses necessary force to:

stop them carrying out unlawful violence

make a lawful arrest

stop them escaping lawful detainment, and

stop a riot or uprising.

Of course, even in these circumstances, the force used must be essential and strictly proportionate. Force is ‘proportionate’ when it is appropriate and no more than necessary to address the problem concerned.

The positive obligation on the state to protect a person’s life is not absolute. Due to limited resources, the state might not always be able fulfil this obligation. This could mean, for example, that the state does not have to provide life-saving drugs to everyone in all circumstances.

Using this right – example

A social worker from the domestic violence team in a local authority used human rights arguments to get new accommodation for a woman and her family at risk of serious harm from a violent ex-partner. She based her case on the local authority’s obligation to protect the family’s right to life and the right not to be treated in an inhuman or degrading way.

(Example provided by the British Institute of Human Rights)

What the law says

This text is taken directly from the Human Rights Act.

Article 2: Right to life

1. Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.

2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:

in defence of any person from unlawful violence

in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained, and

in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.

Note: See Article 1 of Protocol 13 for the wording in the Act that makes the death penalty illegal in the UK.

Example case: Pretty v United Kingdom [2002]

A woman suffering from an incurable degenerative disease wanted to control when and how she died. To avoid an undignified death, she wanted her husband to help her take her life. She sought assurance that he would not be prosecuted, but the European Court of Human Rights found that the right to life does not create a right to choose death rather than life. It meant there was no right to die at the hands of a third person or with the assistance of a public authority.

Case summary taken from Human rights, human lives: a guide to the Human Rights Act for public authorities, which shares examples and legal case studies that show how human rights work in practice.

Answer:

Traumatic Dissociative Amnesia, maybe dissociative identity disorder depending on how they decide to cope with it. they could also very well develop a multitude of personalities or start mentally/emotionally regressing in age.

Answer:

The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890

Explanation:

Answer:

Sherman Antitrust Act

Answer:

Q1: 3 - Situational identity

Explanation:

When a person or people put forward or submit one or more possible social identities to match the current situation or context, (which may be religious, political, or ethnic) they are said to be utilizing a situational identity.

Q2: 2 - Symbolic Identity.

Explanation:

Another word for symbolic identity is non-material.

It refers to the capacity to acquire and relate symbolic practices from one generation to another.

So when an ethnic group displays in their daily activities, symbols that depict their affiliations, they are said to be engaging in non-material or symbolic identity. As given in the question, wearing a T-shirt with the said depiction is a perfect example.

Q3: 3- Reference Group

Explanation

As the name implies, when a person uses another or group of persons as a standard of comparison, they become to that person or group as a standard of reference. This is the case with Klaus' siblings.

Q4: - Government Policies

Explanation

The Los Angeles Government has an arm called the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA). They are responsible for helping individuals and families who are faced with or at risk of being homeless. This body is formed by government policy.

Q5: 2- Gender Nonconformity.

Explanation

When a person refers behaves in a what that does not conform with the attitudinal or behavioral norms expected of that gender, they are said to be exhibiting Gender Nonconformity.

Cheers!

1. While Moria Noel Xavier travels in Scotland and goes by her Scottish maiden name, McTaggart, it is an example of 3. Situational Identity.

Moria's visit to her homeland allows her to display her Scottish identity because it is very useful for her to identify with her ethnicity.

2. However, wearing a "kiss me, I am Irish" shirt on St. Patrick's day is an example of 2. Symbolic Identity.

Symbolic identity is only relevant on specific occasions.  For example, on St. Patrick's day, wearing a "kiss me, I am Irish" shirt does not significantly impact everyday life because the wearer may not be a Christian.

3. Based on the comparison of his performance vis-à-vis his siblings, we can conclude that Klaus's siblings are acting as his 3. Reference group.

A reference group becomes a standard for evaluating oneself and performance. Other normative reference groups for comparing Klaus' performance are parents, peers, teachers, associates, and friends.

4. The factors which assist individuals to exit homelessness in Los Angeles 2. Employment and government policies.

Homelessness is a serious problem in many U.S. towns, including Los Angeles.

5. Telling Lil and Phil apart is enabled by the bow that Lil wears every day. Thus, it is an example of 3., Gender Expression.

With gender expression, Lil can show her gender identity (being female) by the clothes she wears.

Learn more about social identities here: https://brainly.com/question/24647798

The correct answer is C. The United States and the Soviet Union held the balance of power.

Explanation

The Suez crisis was a military conflict developed in Egypt in 1956. In this conflict, the military alliance formed by the United Kingdom, France, and Israel fought against Egypt supported by the Arab League. This conflict originated because the Egyptian government wanted to nationalize control over the Suez Canal that had been under the control of France and the United Kingdom. For their part, the United States and the Soviet Union opposed this intervention because it threatened their political and economic interests, so the United States requested the withdrawal of the allies, and the Soviet Union threatened to use weapons of mass destruction on the capital cities of England and France. From the above, it can be inferred that in the Suez crisis that the great powers of the moment managed the world under their interests and wanted to keep power balanced between the two of them.

Answer:

is as important to listen critically as it is to read critically. Critical listening is a process for understanding what is said and evaluating, judging, and forming an opinion on what you hear.

Answer:

The international monetary system in place

from 1945 to 1971 , with par value based on

gold and the US dollar

Answer:100^w

Explanation:

Answer:

Meaning of Human Resources:

By the term human resources we mean the size of population of a country along-with its efficiency, educational qualities, productivity, organisational abilities and farsightedness. By human resource we mean human capital. Human capital implies the abilities, skills and technical knowhow among the population of the country. A country should introduce manpower planning for the development of its human resources.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Human resources must be considered both from the angle of assets as well as the liabilities connected with the attainment of economic development. For the attainment of economic development, proper utilisation of both natural as well as human resources is very much essential.

Proper utilisation of natural endowments and the level of production of national wealth depend very much on the extent and efficiency of human resources.

But too much population will again eat up all the fruits of development. Thus from the point of view of economic welfare, it is quite essential to study human resources in detail. It should be equally stressed that human beings are the vital instrument of production and at the same time, fruits of all economic activities are rested on the betterment of conditions of living of human beings.

Thus in view of its importance, it is quite essential to know both in quantitative and qualitative terms, the size, rate of growth, the composition, distribution and all other demographic features of population of India

Answer:

I hope it helped U

stay safe stay happy

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

Although there are no options attached we can say the following.

What should a leader do to dispel any notion or misperception that there are in-groups and out-groups in his or her work unit?

The leader has no very congruent with his decisions and actions. This is a must. People will closely observe the behavior of the leader to find real matches on what he says, promises acts, and delivers.

The leader has to establish a professional relationship with each group and every single member of the group. No preferences. No special concessions. The leader has to treat people with respect, correctly, and deliver on its promises. The members of the group should not notice any considerable difference in the way some groups are treated, compared to others.

The leader knows that evaluation in the workplace is by results not friendship.

The leader has to lead by example. It has to be a great communicator, a good listener. Have a set of skills and abilities to perform under pressure.

The leader has to make the toughest decisions. And of course, he has to hire the best individuals to form a true team.

Answer:

Explanation

Explanation:

The Above passage is an Explanation ( a very detailed explanation to why a radio signal carrying Morse code on a continuous wave should be used in conveying information instead of the use of a Modulated radio signal ).

Also This is because the passage sheds light on some uncommon knowledge hence we will categorize it as an explanation.

Answer:

I don't need image of one you before lithium Bellingham sodium magnesium

Answer:

it gives someone to blame

Explanation:

poverty of people from countries such as the uk and america, that accept immigrants and refugees, can cause xenophobia because seeing someone in success that right winged people see as 'not belonging' can give them someone to blame such as

"people cant afford high paid jobs and taxing because imigrants and refugees take the jobs leaving people to get sacked"

more stories you can see

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/brexit-prejudice-scientists-link-foreigners-immigrants-racism-xenophobia-leave-eu-a8078586.html

Explanation:

It's full question? Can you upload image?

Answer:

True

Explanation:

Answer:

Migration is important for the transfer of manpower and skills and provides the needed knowledge and innovation for global growth. In order to address the issues raised by global migration, it is necessary to improve international coordination.

Hope it helps....

Answer:

B hope this helps

Explanation:

Answer:

Rebecca: "What if I leave class a little bit early? That way you can hang out with your brother and your friends, even if you're late to the game.

Explanation:

The compromising conflict style is a conflict management style that aims to bring a little compromise to the demands of all parties involved in a conflict in order to bring a balance or arrive at a common ground that at least brings a solution/cooperation and ends the conflict. This is what happens in the above example where Rebecca tries to compromise a little so that Tom could go for his poker and in that way there is no conflict.

Voting: A Right, A Privilege, or A Responsibility?

When Americans talk about their democracy, they typically emphasize the importance of the right to vote. But the fact is that, unlike other democratic rights protected in the First Amendment, voting rights do not have clear constitutional protections. State legislatures have the right to appoint electors in presidential races without holding elections, for example, and states can enact a variety of policies that directly or indirectly infringe on suffrage rights. While strengthening voting rights in the Constitution would seem like a logical step, there's a potential political barrier: confusion about the meaning of "right."  

This essay invites readers to question whether the ability to vote should be a right, a privilege, or a responsibility. For the ease of readership, I will define the necessary terms:  

At first glance, it's easy to view these terms as mutually exclusive. From their definitions, we can see that what is a "privilege" cannot be a right since rights are enjoyed by everyone, while a privilege is reserved for a select group. Likewise, it's impossible for an individual to take on the burden of responsibility if they lack to the right to vote in the first place.

Despite this initial judgment, many people view the ability to vote as all three simultaneously and weigh "right" after "privilege" or "responsibility." For example, many believe the ability to vote is a privilege granted to today's eligible voters by those who fought for it in the past either through war, grassroots movements, or legislative battles. These struggles have kept the United States as an independent nation and granted us the right to vote with the passage of the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th amendment, in addition to the legislative victory of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. From this perspective, it is a privilege to live in the United States, standing on the shoulders of these past giants, and we have a responsibility to vote because it honors those who have put their lives on the line to protect it.

Indeed a study conducted in 2006 by Peter D. Hart Research Associates found far most participants in a series of focus groups saw voting as a responsibility or a privilege more than as a right. Many categorized voting primarily as a privilege because previous generations had fought for it and other countries don't enjoy the same freedom. The plurality of participants saw it primarily as a responsibility because it highlights the importance of choosing the government. Many of these participants chose not to classify it primarily as a "right" because the word "right" suggested to them a sense of entitlement.

Many participants also believed that fraud was a bigger problem than disenfranchisement. Although these beliefs are not based in reality (proven cases of voter fraud are miniscule compared to clear cases of denial of suffrage), they say something very important about the general mindset of American voters. When it comes to voting, "right" is a dangerous word since it suggests the ability to vote has simply been given to you without a fight -- and things that can make voting harder but prevent fraud like voter registration laws, requirements for photo identification and inconvenient polling places are minor compared to the sacrifices of past generations. In this mindset, anyone who might not vote due to such barriers is not accepting responsibility for how important it is and not recognizing what a privilege it is to have the right to vote.

As is obvious from the Peter Hart study, a common misconception is the word "right" denoting a sense of entitlement. People who hold this view shy away from considering the ability to vote a right because it suggests it has simply been given to us without historical struggles, thereby demeaning the individuals who have laid their lives on the line to forge and preserve our freedoms.

Answer:

Abraham Lincoln

Explanation:

Hopefully this helps :)

Answer:

1. right to own property

2.right to opinion and information

3 right of peaceful assembly and associaty

4. right to social security

5. right of equality

6 .right of education

7. right of social security

8. freedom from slavery

9. freedom of opinion and information

Explanation:

that's only i know thanks

pls mark me as brainliest

Answer:

hope it helps

Explanation:

illiterate adults experience poorer health outcomes, less financial security, and lower life expectancies compared to the overall population. Literacy, which conceptually encompasses far more than the ability to read, has become increasingly important as our society becomes ever more dependent on technology.

Answer:

i would use the key

Explanation:

the key shows what is what.

Prior to the U.S. military campaign against the Islamic State that began in summer 2014, executive branch

officials made statements that included certain interpretations2

concerning the 2001 AUMF, including the

following:

- The 2001 AUMF is primarily an authorization to enter into and prosecute an armed

conflict against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

- The 2001 AUMF authorizes the President to use military force against Al Qaeda and the

Taliban outside Afghanistan, but such uses of force must meet a higher standard of threat

to the United States and must use limited, precise methods against specific individual

targets rather than general military action against enemy forces.

- Because the 2001 AUMF authorizes U.S. involvement in an international armed conflict,

the international law of armed conflict informs the authority within the 2001 AUMF. This

law permits the use of military force against forces associated with Al Qaeda and the

Taliban as co-belligerents; such forces must be operating in some sort of coordination and

cooperation with Al Qaeda and/or the Taliban, not just share similar goals, objectives, or

ideologies.

This interpretation of the scope of 2001 AUMF authority can be seen to fit within the overall framework

of presidential power to use military force against those posing a threat to U.S. national security and U.S.

interests

In situations where the 2001 AUMF or other relevant legislation does not seem to authorize a

given use of military force or related activity, the executive branch will determine whether the President's

Article II powers as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive, as interpreted by the executive branch

itself, might authorize such actions. In this way, similar U.S. military action to meet U.S. counterterrorism

objectives might be interpreted to fall under different authorities, of which the 2001 AUMF is just one,

albeit important, example.

December 2016 Legal Framework Report on Use of Military Force

President Obama issued a report in December 2016 entitled, “Report on the Legal and Policy Frameworks

Guiding the United States’ Use of Military Force, and Related National Security Operations.”4 Among

other matters, the Report deals with the legal justification for the United States’ ongoing use of military

force against the Islamic State, which according to the Report has taken place in the form of airstrikes,

military advising and training of Iraqi security forces and Syrian rebel groups, and military activities of

U.S. special operations forces in Iraq, Syria, and Libya.5 The Report asserts that such use of force is

authorized by the 2001 AUMF, arguing certain factors.

Answer:

reinforcement.

Explanation:

Classical conditioning can be defined as a learning process which involves repeatedly pairing two stimuli: conditioned stimulus and unconditioned stimulus.

In classical conditioning, a response which is at first brought forth by the second stimulus is later brought forth by the first stimulus alone.

Therefore, it is a learning procedure that helps us to understand when a neutral stimulus is paired with a conditioned response.

According to the cognitive description of classical conditioning, reinforcement is the key to the process.

A reinforcement of a desired behavior involves the process of strengthening a positive behavior being exhibited by an individual through the use of stimulus. Therefore, making the behavior to be exhibited in the future by the individual.

For example, through the reinforcement of desired behaviors with rewards, parents, teachers and leaders can help students and other people in building positive norms.

Answer:

reinforcement

Explanation:

According to the cognitive description of classical conditioning = reinforcement.

Answer:

oxidation

Explanation:

A risky behavior is generally, and fairly simply, understood in social sciences as a behavior that exposes you to potential harm.

mark me brainliesttt :))

Explanation:

insulting others on the internet

. Socialization: some ppl jus join in protest to meet new ppl, get into new relationship and all that and if possible they might meet their soulmates..

. Means of Distraction: some ppl use protest as a means of distraction to steal. Cos everyone will b focused on the reason behind the protest and won't be fully conscious about the valuables they carried along with them.

. Also some terrorist may plan on destroying infrastructure using the protest as a cover-up.

Hi. You have not informed the institutions to which your question refers, which makes it impossible for this question to be answered. however, I will try to help you as best I can.

Generally speaking, we can affirm that human rights are the basic rights that protect the dignity of human beings and must be distributed equally to all. There are some institutions that work directly with these rights and have very important functions to protect them. To find out what the specific functions of each institution are, and thus answer your question, you need to search for each one of them. A quick internet search should be enough to present the information you need. Below, I will list some of the most important institutions and their role in protecting human rights, I hope this can help you.

UNESCO: Is responsible for promoting peace and encouraging the provision of education, culture and communication to under-resourced communities.

WHO: Its responsibility is to promote international cooperation to provide better levels of health to all countries in an equitable and efficient manner.

International Labor Organization: Protects labor rights and promotes the opening of international jobs.