Duck Hunting Essay Example for Free

Duck Hunting Essay In the earliest of time, duck hunting was essential. Indian tribes would use canoes and dogs to catch ducks to feed their families. They would leave early in the morning to beat the sunrise and get out on the water. Ducks were hunted in January and February when they’re fat for better feeding. Then, in the 1800’s the breach-loading shotgun was created for field sports. This allowed duck hunting easier because now they are easily shot in flight instead of canoeing. The shotgun is quickly reloaded so that more duck can be hunted in a single setting. Ducks and other birds have great eyesight, which made them harder to be hunted so the creation of camouflage came about. Hunters would wear clothes to blend in with the trees, grass, and environment surrounding them. They then began building duck blinds out of wooden frames and screened with brush and grass so that the hunter would be hard to see. Then, in the 1960’s decoys were made from carved and painted wood to float in the water. They are spread out so that ducks are encouraged to land on the water. Finally, we have the duck call. This was created to mimic many sounds of ducks so that they will land in the spread of decoys for easier an easier kill. Many people hear of duck hunting and think that it can be very easily done, but this isn’t true. Duck hunters have to scout the land and water days before the hunt so that they can hunt strategically. These days, it is required for hunters to have a hunting license in order to even participate in this field sport. Any other actions taken before having a hunting license or before the season has officially opened is illegal. Duck hunters spend many hours practicing shooting clay targets in the air so that they’re prepared for the hunt ahead of time. In late September, duck hunting season officially opens. Hunters will wake up early in the morning and get dressed up in their camouflage. They go out and hook up their boats and put their decoys in the bed. Each decoy has a clip or hook on the bottom of the body. This clip allows the hunter to attach each decoy to one another about 2 to 3 feet apart. The clips are attached to a jerk cord so that the hunter can place in a line and pull from their duck blind to make to decoys move realistically. Then, the hunter loads up his shotgun and his dog and heads out to the drop to put his boat in the water. Duck hunters usually do not travel alone. They travel in a group of about 4 or 5 people so that they have more shots fired in one blind. All the hunters get into the boat and travel out to the duck blind. When they finally get there, they ease into the water and pull the supplies out so that the can hide their boat. Hunters will spread out their decoys strategically in the water at about 6 o’clock according to the placement of the blind and wind direction. This takes about 30 to 45 minutes to set up correctly. Then, the hunters get inside the blind, load up their shotguns, and put on their face paint for better camouflage. The hunters are only allowed to shoot at 7 o’clock a. m. and any time after that so they usually wait in the blind. When starting time comes around they start looking for ducks. As soon as they see a good group of them they start blowing on their duck call to try and pull the ducks in to their decoys. All the ducks will fly around in a large circle and if they like the call they will begin cupping towards the water. When they start to land and are just right off the top of the water, the hunters will begin firing. Any duck they kill is out in the water for the dog to fetch. The most common dogs used for duck hunting are Labrador Retrievers, Pointers, English Setters, English Cocker Spaniels, Coonhound, and Chesapeake Bay Retrievers. These dogs are trained very well in hunting ducks and usually other birds so when the duck hit the water that dog is gone. Hunters will go at it for hours and hours to try and limit out. They’ll blow the call, shoot, reload, and do it all over again every time there are ducks flying around. Towards the end of the hunt, they will load up their decoys, dog, and shotgun. They’ll pull the boat out in the open for the drive back to the trailer. Then, they have to load the boat up and this could take some time if you don’t know what you’re doing. The driver maneuvers the boat nice and snug into place and the other guys pull it up, latch it to the trailer crank, and put the brace in place for the motor. The hunters will take off their wet waders and put them in the back of the truck and load up their dogs for the trip back home. Finally, when they get back to the house, they’ll pull the ducks out and put them on the tailgate. The hunters will take their knife and make an incision about 6 inches long down the middle of the ducks belly. Then, with their hands they will tear away the feathers and skin of the ducks body. Finally, once looking at the ducks innards they will cut out the two breasts inside the ducks sternum. These two breasts are soaked and washed in warm water so that there is no blood or feathers left behind on the duck meat. Then, they are put into a plastic baggie and frozen until use. Duck hunting is a lot of fun because of the thrill that it gives you to hunt flying game. At the same time, this isn’t the easiest hunting trip you’ll make. Duck hunters will hunt in the most mild or extreme conditions just to get a kill. Their waders could have holes; their duck calls could get frozen up; and their guns could jam. Hunters don’t have it easy like most people think, just imagine you having to hunt every day of your life to feed your family. That’s a crazy thought, but I can only seem to think that it may be a way of like for some people. This is how duck hunting is done most commonly these days. Finally, I will leave you with a quote I once heard. â€Å"If you’re not rippin lips and stackin quackers, you’re drinkin the wrong water†.

Overloking Potential Honor Roll Students :: essays papers

Overloking Potential Honor Roll Students Overlooking Potential Honor Roll Students? Everyone wants their school to be the best. They want them to have the best sports teams, perform the best over all on standardize tests, and have the best extra curricular activities. This is what the University High School admissions board has in mind when looking through the applications usually numbering around 750-900 for the next school year to offer admission to only 150 of those applicants. In reality, they divide the applicants into districts according to where they live, then subdivide those into racial groups. After those have been considered is when they look at who has the potential to offer University High the most, in a variety of areas. They have to accept a certain number of students from each district and a certain amount of students of different ethnic backgrounds to be seen as politically correct. The question being posed here is whether or not that is to the benefit of U-High. During the course of trying to answer that question, two sides of the argument are to be considered. The first is that the way that it is being done is the fairest way in making sure that there is no racial or economic discrimination. The second side to the argument is that there might be a larger number of gifted students in a certain group that can not all be admitted into U-High because it could be seen as if they were being favored. Both sides of the argument will be examined more carefully. To begin with, in the past, our country has demonstrated great racial discrimination. There was segregation, and there were also hate groups. There were people that believed that people other than whites were inferior to those of white skin color. However, lately there has been a wonderful realization in our society. The majority of our society views it as wrong to discriminate. It is seen as politically incorrect. Though there are no laws telling people how to think, there are, however, laws that prohibit discrimination in the workforce and most important to this issue, laws prohibiting discrimination in the educational system. To ensure and mostly to prove that there is no racial hatred towards any ethnic groups, U-High adopted a new way to process the applications of possible future students. They now have a quota of students with certain ethnic backgrounds to meet.

Single Sex Are Better For All Students Essay

Single sex schools will help students improve in a majority of things. Single sex schools are better for all students because they improve the students’ behavior, grades and health. Single sex schools are better for students because they are not surrounded by students who pick on the opposite sex constantly. The students would not have to worry about being shy because the opposite sex does not attend to the school. At certain ages, opposite sex in the same class can be a distraction. The students seem to relieve more pressure with the other gender not being there and that helps them more than people actually think. Few educators are formally trained to use gender-specific teaching technique. However, it is no secret that experienced teachers usually understand gender differences and accommodating a variety of learning styles in the mixed-gender classrooms. This is that the students actually behave with the other gender not being in the same room Educating single-sex schools limit their opportunity to work cooperatively and co-exist successfully with members of the opposite sex. Students are able to cooperate more without the opposite sex being in the same classroom. Secondly, the grades of the students are very important. The grades are important because in some cases, it could help the student get an acceptance letter to a good college. This is why students should keep grades above average and also get involved sports. Test scores would be higher and the school’s academic success would be increased by being in a single sex school. Students would stay in school rather than drop out because they feel like someone cares about their education. Single sex schools would have better connection with their students. Students would also have high class grades because they can focus more without the other gender.

Does the law in ADAMS v CAPE PLC still good law or should further reform prevail - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 7 Words: 2117 Downloads: 6 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Analytical essay Level High school Did you like this example? Does the law in ADAMS v CAPE PLC still good law or should further reform prevail? The approach in Adams v Cape plc in lifting the veil of incorporation has always been a debatable issue. Despite the obvious economic connection between companies within the same group, English company law has steadfastly maintained its policy of treating such companies as distinct legal entities. . To lift or not to lift the veil of incorporation is a matter for the court to decide in each and every case. Should the approach in Adams v Cape plc ltd (1990) continue to be used or statutory provisions should come into play? Years ago the English Courts had established the basic principle of separate corporate personality: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“the corporation has a separate existence from the shareholderà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  per Vaughan Williams J in Salomon v Salomon. It is the leading case on the fundamental importance of the separate personality of a company. A distinct legal personality can own and deal with property, sue and be sued in its own name and contract on its own behalf. The emergence of group structures in UK was to curtail tax as the Corporate Structures became more prominent. When we speak of lifting the veil of incorporation it equals to a veil which stands in between the company and its members, employees, employers and shareholders. If the veil of incorporation is removed both bodies would be treated as a single legal entity. Just like in any state of affairs we have a conqueror and a loser, the Court often founds itself into the quandary as whether to lift or not to lift the veil of incorporation to determine where the loss lie, more explicitly who will bear the burden of costs. The Court will either award an injunction; Gilford motor Company Ltd v Horne (1933), specific performance; Jones v Lipman (1962) or damages. An enhanced picture of Group companies consist of a parent A ltd which is the chief company and its two subsidiaries X ltd and Y ltd. If A ltd runs its most perilous business through X ltd and in the event X ltd collapse or goes into liquidation and a person is injured while working, the question which arises is whether the parent company A ltd should be liable for its subsidiaries. In economic reality there is a sole business pertaining work through three different legal personalities. Yet again the question is should the veil be lifted or not. In Re A Company (1985) it was held that irrespective of corporate structure used, the veil will be lifted to achieve justice. The key case regarding parent and Subsidiaries Company is Adams v Cape Plc Ltd (1990). Its judgement has drastically narrowed the ability of the courts to lift the veil. Here the subsidiaries found in the US mined asbestos and when Adam while working in one of Cape Ltd subsidiaries was injured sought relief against the parent company fund in the UK. The Court of Appeal revised this complex area of law and concluded that the veil should be lifted in three conditions. Primarily where the corporate structure is a mere faÃÆ' §ade concealing the true facts. Furthermore if an express agency relationship exists between a company and its shareholders or between a parent and subsidiary company in a group structure. Thirdly where the group of companies is in reality a single economic entity. The motive of the subsidiary company in Adams was to prevent tax and there were no express agency agreement since parent company had no control over the subsidiary company. Therefore, the Court didnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t lift the veil of incorporation. If one of the above three issues are present the veil of incorporation will be lifted. Otherwise the Salomon principle applies. We has had statutory intervention under s.399 CA 2006 where parent companies have a duty to produce Group accounts and under s.409 CA 2006 they have to provide details of shares it holds in the subsidiaries and subsidiaries names and country of activity. Also s.993 CA 2006 introduces the criminal offence of fraudulent trading. Nevertheless the Court has always been keen and watchful in safeguarding the corporate veil. Sec 213-215 Insolvency Act 1986 deal veil lifting. Since the Corporate form was being used as an instrument of fraud namely fraudulent trading s.213 Insolvency Act 1986 came into play but the dilemma was that we had to prove intent which was difficult and attracted criminal charge of imprisonment and fine. S.213 of the Insolvency Act 1986 deals with situation where any business of the company carries intent to defraud and applies to everyone. The purpose of this section was to restrict fraudulent trading, nonetheless, the high standard of proof as required by the court negated its effect due to the possibility of a criminal charge arising. s.214 Insolvency Act 1986 on the other hand applies mainly to directors who had been negligent leading to the insolvency of the company for example in Re Produce Marketing Consortium Ltd (19 89) the 2 directors were liable to pay  £75000 to the debts of the company since they didnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t put the company in liquidation before it reached to the point of insolvency. Since Adams the Court has lifted the veil of incorporation in various state of affairs. For example in tort in Lubbe v Cape Plc (2000), the parent company owed a duty of care to anybody injured by subsidiary company in a group and in Chandler v Cape Plc (2011) duty of care has been breached by parent company. The point in tort is that a personal injury caused by a UK subsidiary operating in a jurisdiction with a developed country such as USA will not give rise to any liability on part of the parent company but a personal injury caused by a subsidiary of a UK company in an underdeveloped jurisdiction will. In addition, if the tort is deceit rather than negligent, Court will allow liability to flow to director or employee. In so far the court has extended the principle of lifting the veil of incorporation in various new situations which arose and the Court was left to the choice of whether to lift the corporate veil or not. Location Title Words Matched Match (%) Unique Words Matched Unique Match (%) Documents found to be plagiarised https://www.icaew.com/en/technical/legal-and-regulatory/company-law/directors-duties-and-derivative-actions Directors duties and derivative actions | Modernising UK 244 10 244 10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallersteiner_v_Moir_(No_2)Wallersteiner v Moir (No 2) Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 45 2 45 2 https://quizlet.com/20863950/company-11-majority-rule-flash-cards/Company 11 : Majority rule flashcards | Quizlet 664 27 534 22 https://www.routledge.com/cw/revision2/p/company/Company Law Routledge Revision61 3 0 1 https://law.oxy.co/the-doctrine-of-foss-v-harbottle-94620/The doctrine of foss v harbottle Online law school 77 3 0 1 https://quizlet.com/30315857/company-law-shareholder-cases-flash-cards/Company Law Shareholder Cases flashcards | Quizlet 31 1 0 1 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/11/chapter/1/enactedCompanies Act 2006 legislation 140 6 0 1 https://www.scribd.com/doc/82932029/Shareholders-Derivative-ClaimsShareholders Derivative Claims Scribd Read Unlimited Books 47 2 0 1 https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldbills/098/06098.110-115.htmlCompany Law Reform Bill [HL] 103 4 0 1 https://www.kenyalawresourcecenter.org/2011/07/majority-rule-foss-vs-harbottle-1843.html Kenya Law Resource Center: MAJORITY RULE ( Foss vs 64 3 10 1 https://www.mondaq.com/x/54792/Directors+Officers/A+Guide+To+The+Companies+Act+2006+Part+1 A Guide To The Companies Act 2006 Part 1 Corporate 95 4 0 1 https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/business-law/development-of-statutory-derivative-actions-business-law-essay.php Development of Statutory Derivative Actions | Law Teacher 50 2 0 1 https://www.lees.co.uk/news/protection-for-minority-shareholders /Protection for minority shareholders Lees Solicitors 78 3 34 1 https://www.mondaq.com/x/131408/Directors+Officers+Executives+Shareholders/Minority+Shareholders+Protection+In+Cyprus+Remedies+Available Minority Shareholders Protection In Cyprus ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“ Remedies 17 1 0 1 https://www.scribd.com/doc/155477950/Book-by-Dignam-and-Lowry-Company-LawBook by Dignam and Lowry Company Law Scribd 613 25 49 2 https://falguni-moyeed.blogspot.com/2011/05/s260-of-company-act-2006-is-unnecessary.html S.260 of Company Act 2006 is an unnecessary piece of legislation. 198 8 0 1 https://quizlet.com/22921227/derivative-claims-flash-cards/DERIVATIVE CLAIMS flashcards | Quizlet 129 5 0 1 https://www.legal500.com/assets/images/stories/firmdevs/shareholders_protection.docwww.legal500.com 17 1 0 1 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/260Companies Act 2006 Legislation.gov.uk 48 2 0 1 https://www.out-law.com/page-8207Remedies where there is a breach of directors duties 40 2 0 1 https://www.mondaq.com/x/52870/Corporate+Governance/New+Derivative+Action+May+Lead+To+Increased+Claims+Against+Directors New Derivative Action May Lead To Increased Claims Against 18 1 0 1 https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/190/06190.111-117.htmlCompany Law Reform Bill [HL] 114 5 0 1 https://www.scribd.com/doc/196444315/76768383-Company-Law-Guide76768383 Company Law Guide 613 25 0 1 Matching Content: 40%. Moreover in Prest v Petrodel [2013] seven companies held by Mr Prest a very wealthy man could be transferred to his wife upon dissolution of their marriage as ancillary relief during Matrimonial proceedings. While the defence of Mr Prest was that his companies should have separate legal entity, the Court of Appeal held that the corporate veil will be pierced in very limited circumstances. Firstly where there is a deliberate abuse of a corporate entity (i.e. to hide behind the corporate veil) for improper pu rposes and secondly the specific facts show that the assets are genuinely held on trust for a party to the proceedings. The reason why Mrs Prest succeeded in her claim was due to the special facts of her case. At various time Mr Prest tried to conceal the fact that the seven companies were held on trust for him. Moreover both he and the company failed to cooperate with disclosure allowed the court to infer that Mr Prest and the companies were attempting to hide the true beneficial owner of the properties. However it should be noted in this case, Lord Sumption sheds light on the nature and extent of the doctrine. He extracted principles which are concealment and evasion principles. In the first principle we have to investigate as to who are the à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"real actorsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ that is . the real controller of the company just like in Gilford Motors v Horne. In the latter principle, the Court pierces the veil to prevent a party from avoiding a legal obligation by virtue of the fact that they have interposed a company in an attempt to defeat a right which will be enforced against them. To conclude with the question of whether to lift the veil of incorporation or not will depend on each and every case. The Court has always respected the legal personality of a company and will lift the veil in very limited conditions. The separate legal personality of the company has been established for more than a century, the decades that have intervened have encouraged a belief in this principle but have also allowed exceptions to the concept when lifting of this corporate veil is permitted for example in situations of fraud, or sham. Nevertheless the courts have the power to continue developing the law in this area when public policy requires it. It can be seen in Prest v Petrodel (2013) that a director can be liable to contribute to the debts of the company if he has been negligent in the company going into insolvent liquidation and did nothing to prevent that. The veil will be pierced if subsidiaries have been created with motive of defrauding creditors or to prevent a transaction. Moreover, if the subsidiary company worked under the control of the parent company and there was an express agency agreement between the two such that the two are inter-linked. If tort is deceit instead of negligent liability will flow to employees or director. Furthermore, the Court wonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t be easily fooled if someone tried consistently to conceal facts which are of utmost importance for the Court. Thus there is currently the possibility of extension of the law at the courtsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ discretion. My study of the law in this area leads me to the conclusion that the case for more radical reform of liabilities within groups has not been made. The law as it currently stands reflects the balance that is required between the needs of the economy and the needs of justice. Words: 1687 Bibliography Wikipedia University of Leceister ( pdf notes) Lawteacher.net Corporatewatch.org.uk Secondary sources Recent developments of company law (UOL) Alan Dignam and John Lowry . In this category most specifically we refer to sham. In Gilford Motor CO ltd v Horne (1933), a former employee was bound by a contractual obligation not to solicit customers from his former employer after he left the job. To avoid the contractual obligation horne incorporate a company and solicit customers. The court found that it was in the interest of justice for the court to act as the new company was a sham. Similarly in jones v lipman the court held that company was a sham and was an attempt to avod a pre existing legal oblgation. the court gave an order for specific performance for the house to be transferred to the original purchasers. Company Law Textbook Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Does the law in ADAMS v CAPE PLC still good law or should further reform prevail?" essay for you Create order