NATURAL HAZARDS VOLCANOES Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

NATURAL HAZARDS VOLCANOES - Essay Example (Adams, 1981). 2. Volcanoes are very likely to erupt on these islands due to the existence of ‘live’ volcanic centers. It is more likely to occur in other countries such as Nevis, Eustatius and Saba in the near future because they have live volcanic centers. (University of the West Indies Seismic Research Centre) 4. When a super-volcanic eruption occurs, usually it covers extensive areas with volcanic ash and lava that results in a prolong weather change such as the reduction in the temperature of the atmosphere and the earth’s surface, referred to as ice age or glacial age, which can threaten the life of species. (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Volcanic eruptions, though disruptive and destructive to human, the environment and animal life, provides immense benefits to people who live near to them. The ash that is thrown when there is a volcanic eruption can be very harmful to the environment shortly after, however in the long term the ash layer converts to a very fertile soil, which contains many useful minerals. Volcanoes can produce very magnificent scenery like the beautiful sunsets from explosive eruptions.   They also create beautiful lava fountains, stunning eruptions and plant-rich environments. People will return and live after a volcanic eruption because of the fertile soil around the volcano, where they use the rich soil for farming.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The resources that are produced from volcanic eruptions are used for energy extraction, also called geothermal resources.   Energy is produced as a result of heat from the earths crust.   The great advantages are that this energy is very clean and the resources are almost inexhaustible. Another great economical benefit of volcanic eruptions is that it generates tourism. This translates to jobs and foreign exchange income. This can also result in an improvement in people’s standard of living.

Influence of Money and Media on Elections

Influence of Money and Media on Elections During elections, electoral networks drive the â€Å"every vote counts† campaign, but the voter appeal is lost due to the high value placed in high-proficiency media and the conniving, slick interest groups that use propaganda to persuade voter turn-out. There lie many problems in the world of politics. Nasty campaigning and slamming ones opponent have become a commonplace in todays society. The root of these distinct problems doesnt stem directly from the candidates themselves, but rather the national committees for the Republicans and Democrats that represent them. The money which is spent by the massive institutions to their partys candidate in each election is overwhelming, but also impacts the public persona which is seen through the exorbitant and high-priced media campaigns that seduce public interest There are very specific rules that are governed rigidly regarding campaign financing. However the major national committees for the Republicans and Democrats have found ways around this system. The campaign financing rules are simple. Individual people are permitted to give $1000 per candidate per election, whereas interest groups are allowed to donate up to $5000 per candidate per election. In comparison to the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by both major parties, these are relatively small amounts of money. These national committees of the major parties use non-federal accounts to accumulate what is known as â€Å"soft money.† There are no limits on how much a party can spend at local levels for grass roots party building. The money in the non-federal regulated accounts is funneled to states, which are used to endorse or bash one of the candidates. Each major political party spends soft money in places where they have available seats in office and where they know they can retain them. This allows them to ensure more political influence in Congress. If a party feels they cannot steal a seat from the other party, the committee is less likely to spend soft money to keep up. The significance of this is that the candidate who spends the most money often wins. Though the large corporations and interest groups are the source of the influence, the political candidate is the face that the American people see to represent their party. This reality has caused voters to doubt whether their individual vote even counts. With each election, more Americans feel that the ultimate cause of who wins is determined by the amount of political wealth and media attention they have acquired. The solution to the problem is simple reform of the laws which govern campaign financing. While the answer may be simple to achieve, the solution is quite a different story. The major parties control the lawmaking body of the United States. Many of these congressmen owe their political position to what is known as soft money. This soft money comes from interest groups and major corporations; leaving the legislators in a very tough position. However if they were to reform the laws, the roles of these interest groups and the money of these corporations would be greatly diminished. It would provide a level playing field in all congressional districts around the nation. Eliminating soft money from politics would be to restore purity in a sense to the political process. Reforming the laws would ensure that political parties can not influence elections through money. It would also prevent interest groups and large corporations from controlling large aspects of todays government. For instance, the new law could set limits on how much money can be spent on television and radio advertisement. When this amount of money has been reached, the candidates could use no more political money for this type of advertisement. By the same token any amount of money could be spent on pamphlets and brochures. Educating voters on the issues and specific candidates stance on those issues is more alluring than oppressing and berating ones political opponent through media advertisement. This would allow the American people to decide based mainly on the issues presented, not through biased media influence. Campaign finance reform is a very hot topic. It seems that many people are jumping on the bandwagon hoping for some good press when a law is finally passed. With our most recent 2008 election, the candidates were undoubtedly fighting for votes in a close election, since the two of them set a record in soft money spent during an election. We need to fight to make politics about prevalent issues and leadership once again and take our country back from large corporations and interest groups that have assumed control through their large resources and persuading media influence.

Racism in Strange Love :: Racism Media Television TV

Racism in Strange Love Do you like having racist jokes made about you right in front of you face and have no idea what the person is saying? In an episode of the Strange Love this situation is demonstrated. Racism is wide spread through out the world and an issue that is brought to our eyes in the show. The issue of interracial dating is also a main topic in the show. Strange Love is a show that most people would watch to get a laugh out of a crazy relationship that came out of another show, but when watching the show I see another part of it and that is racism. The show also to tries to get the thought of interracial relationships more wide spread. -Strange Love was created by the same group of people that had made the show Surreal Life, during the first season a strange relationship came about between Flavor Flav and Brigitte Nielsen. One of the first episodes is showing Flavor Flav leaving the United States and goes to visit Brigitte in Italy and go to a very high class dinner and Flavor does not get the introduction that Brigitte is hoping for him to receive, most of the people are appalled to see the two in a relationship. The episode following that has Brigitte coming with Flavor Flav back to the United States and she accompanies Flavor on stage with Public Enemy. Flavor comments before they go on that his band has no idea that she will be on stage, and she will be the first white woman to ever be on stage with the band. After the band has finished there performance they are backstage and make comments to Flavor about bringing a white woman onstage with him, this leads to Flavor becoming outraged and destroying the backstage area for the band. The episode doesn’t necessarily comment on the topic of racism but just the reaction or the crown and the comments that they make about Flavor are very racist and suggest that they don’t approve of and interracial relationship. Much of the crowd did not even give the couple the time of day and eluded the couple if they were approached.

Analysis of Biff in Death of a Salesman

Camilla Tanzi Year 12 An analysis of the character of Biff. Biff Loman is portrayed as the root of Willy’s mental illness and instability. He is also the only member of his family who acknowledges his own failures in life. On the whole, Biff Loman stands out as the most intriguing and strong character in â€Å"Death of a Salesman. He is not a successful man and never will be, he is however able to admit this, even in a harsh society as the one of the 1960s America. Biff knows he is a â€Å"nothing† and tries to make his father see that he is â€Å"no good.I am a dime a dozen, Pop, and so are you. † He begs for Willy to communicate with him and accept him for who he is. Although Willy is forced by Biff to see some of his own failures, he never accepts that Biff will turn out the same way. At the end of the play, Biff seems to have developed a strength of his own; he has faced and accepted the truth about himself and his father. Now that he acknowledges his proble ms, there is a hope that he will be able to reach his potential. If â€Å"Death of a Salesman† offers any hope, it is only through the character of Biff. Also read: Expressionism in Death of a SalesmanMiller implies there is a chance that he will one day be able to live a normal life, away from the shadow of Willy Loman. Biff stimulates reactions out of his father’s lunacy and is portrayed as the main cause of Willy’s problems. We understand that Willy has been a bad influence on his son and in spite of this; he has big ambitions for Biff and does not want to admit that he will never reach the goals he wishes for him. Being Willy’s oldest son, Biff seems to be the perfect child to his father.However, as the play develops and especially when it shifts from Willy’s dreams to the reality, we see a change in his attitude towards his son. When Biff was the star rugby player, the only thing that mattered to Willy was his success in the sport. As a matter of fact, when Bernard informs Willy and Biff about the possibility of him being â€Å"flunked in math†, Willy’s reply is stiff and arrogant:  "Don’t be a pest, Bernard! (To his boys) What an anaemic! † The use of the word â€Å"anaemic† is a perfect example to show what the man’s morals are; he considers Bernard a teenager who lacks vitality, boring.The author could possibly be implying that Willy is actually envious of Bernard and even though he doesn’t want to admit it, his is just jealousy when he shows aversion towards him. Willy has different ambitions for his sons’ futures than most people had for theirs at the time; he believes that sport will be enough to help Biff succeed in the business world, make him rich and notorious; â€Å"That’s just what I mean, Bernard can get the best marks in school, y’understand, but when he gets out in the business world, y’understand, you’re going to be five times ahead of him. Arthur Miller provides us with a lot of evidence that Willy has been a bad influence on Biff. While Biff is in some ways desperate to impr ess his father, he is also conscious about the fact that Willy has failed his attempt to be successful in his career. He considers his dad’s dreams materialistic and unreachable. As a matter of fact, in the Requiem, even after his father’s death, Biff says: â€Å"He had the wrong dreams. All, all wrong. † Unlike Happy and Willy, Biff is self-aware and values facts; Willy never was a successful salesman and he never wanted to face the truth.On the other hand, Biff is conscious about his failures and the weaknesses of his personality. During an argument with his father, Biff admits that his dad made him â€Å"so arrogant as a boy† that now he just can’t handle taking orders from a boss. I think this is what truly differentiates Biff from the rest of his family; he is honest and sincere about himself and would rather work on a ranch than try to be successful in a work field that he knows will never accept him. Biff is also the only character that acts as a reminder that the American Dream is not an every man’s dream.Bernard has become a successful lawyer as his father Charley, Willy and Happy try to pretend they have too, but Biff is the only one who surrenders to his destiny. Rather than seeking success and money, he wants a basic life working on ranches. He does not try to push into the crowd of people aiming for a good job and a wealthy life-style, but instead wants to be seen for who he truly is: â€Å"Happy: The only thing is- what can you make out there? Biff: But look at your friend. Builds an estate and then doesn’t have the peace of mind to live in it. In a way, Miller is trying to tell us that Americans are made victims of the country’s success. â€Å"Death of a Salesman† seems to argue that America as a whole does not value people who look for simple pleasures such as working in the countryside, and the American Dream pushes people to only aim for jobs in the industry. It is ironic how Ber nard turns out to succeed as a successful and well-known lawyer. It is ironic because during high school Willy used to mock him for studying hard and always praised Biff for not studying at all.Bernard is presented as a weak and shy character and Miller wants us to believe that Biff will turn out to be successful rather than him and not the contrary. However, things turned out differently to how both Willy and Biff expected them to. Bernard’s success irritates Willy because his own sons’ lives do not measure up to Bernard’s: â€Å"(after a pause): I’m- I’m overjoyed to see how you made the grade Bernard, overjoyed. It’s an encouraging thing to see a young man really-really- Looks very good for Biff- very (He breaks off, then) Bernard- (He is so full of emotion, he breaks off again). Once again, Biff is the cause of his father’s despair; he does not want to pursue Willy’s dreams, he wants something other than material things fr om life, and this destroys the man. Biff has learnt from his father that to be â€Å"well-liked† and attractive are the most important ingredients for success. Up to now, I have only analysed the differences between Biff and Willy, however, it is also very important to highlight the few similarities between the two characters. When he was a teenage boy, Willy’s authority on Biff was evident.We find that when the three Loman men are talking about Bernard, Biff echoes small bits of his father’s view on life when he says that his friend is â€Å"liked but not well-liked†. This implies that Biff once used to have respect towards Willy; he admired his strong personality and approved his view on the business world. Biff Loman is aware that he will not succeed as a salesman or any other job without his maths degree. On the other hand, his father is convinced he will and does not what to face the reality of facts. However, towards the end of the play we see a cha nge in both the men’s attitudes.As a matter of fact, they have switched opinions; â€Å"Biff: (horrified, gets down on one knee before Willy): Dad, I’ll make good, I’ll make good. (Willy tries to get to his feet. Biff holds him down. ) Sit down now. Willy: No, you’re no good, you’re no good for anything. † Biff is now desperate and is obviously worried for his father’s mental health and tries to encourage him to be positive in any way he can- even if this involves lying to himself about his potential. As I previously mentioned in my introduction, Biff seems to be the only character that offers any hope whatsoever in â€Å"Death of a Salesman†.At the beginning of the play, he tells the audience about his dreams of living in the south: â€Å"What the hell am I doing, playing around with horses, twenty-eight dollars a week! I’m thirty-four years old, I oughta be makin’ my future. That’s when I coming running home. And now, I get here, and I don’t know what to do with myself. † This clearly shows that biff aspires to better things, but does not know what to do in an industrial city as New York. He wants to succeed and build a future, but at the same time he enjoys the pleasures of living in the countryside and not having any stress.Here is where we understand that Biff is fundamentally lazy. He would like to have a nice and wealthy life, but he just does not have the strength or the motivation to work for it. On the whole, through the illusions that Willy believes, he cannot see Biff as a â€Å"nobody† and cannot accept that he won’t be successful as he hopes. Eventually, Biff finally sees the truth and realises that he is â€Å"no great leader of men†. He also comprehends the delusions that Willy lived on. Biff is destined to no greatness, but he no longer has to struggle to understand what he wants to do with his life; â€Å"I know who I am, kid. â₠¬ 

Growing Pluralisation and Fragmentation of Policing Essay

This essay aims to explore Button’s (1996) claim that ‘the growing pluralisation and fragmentation of policing†¦has challenged the public police’s claim that to be the primary policing force’. In order to do so, it will provide a general definition of both the public and private policing bodies within the United Kingdom, followed by a brief look at the history of the public Police, their progression and integration with private agencies. The essay will go on to discuss pluralisation and fragmentation, and how these are reflected within the context of the topic. Finally it will identify how various financial constraints have resulted in cutbacks and forced ‘hybrid’ policing in many areas. It will conclude with a reiteration of the main points, supporting Buttons claim that the public Police are not the primary policing force. Within this essay it is not possible to draw a definitive distinction between public Police and private policing bodies or indeed the perimeters in which each work, it is however important to understand the difference between the Police and ‘policing’ – a social function that Reiner (ibid:722 in Button 1996) describes as: ‘An aspect of social control processes which occurs universally in all social situations in which there is at least the potential for conflict, deviance, or disorder.’ Today the word ‘Police’ is used in many civilised countries to describe an organisation whom uphold the law and order in society (Met Police, 2012). Button (1996) describes the Police as: ‘The body of men and women employed by the state who patrol the streets, deal with crime, and ensure order and who undertake a range of other social type functions’. It could it be reasonably argued that the primary difference between public and private police is legislative powers i.e. public police have powers of arrest for arrestable offences not committed within their view where there are reasonable grounds for suspicion (private police can`t make these kinds of arrests) (Citizens Advice Bureau 2012). Circa 1856 members of public, ordinarily the victims, largely conducted policing activities. Any person suspected of committing a crime would be taken to the ‘Parish Constable’, an unpaid position to uphold order (Victorian crime and punishment, 2006). The Police as we know them today were formed in 1829 following the collapse of the ‘Parish Constable’ system (Met Police, 2012). Home Secretary of the time, Sir Robert Peel, was responsible for passing the first Metropolitan Police act forming the Metropolitan Police force, although this only really came to fruition in 1839 when the new City of London Police took control of all independent police activities (Met Police, 2012). G4S (2012) explain that private Police enterprises started out as a very basic, 4-man bicycle team, providing a guard-protection force. ‘The earliest roots in the UK appeared in 1935 when a former cabinet minister launched ‘Night Watch Services’. Historically, pre World War II, private security was frowned upon, seen as thuggery, sneaks and spies with private interests, however, since the War private security has been accepted as a supplement to the much-overburdened public Police. More recently governments have actively encouraged the commercial private sector support to Police, accepting that the extensive and complex nature of crime requires more than the Police have to offer (Bayley and Shearing, 1996). To fully address Button’s statement, it is necessary to understand the definition of pluralisation and fragmentation, and importantly how this is represented within the context of the statement. It is generally accepted that, in many countries, ‘policing’ is now both authorised and delivered by diverse networks of commercial bodies, voluntary and community groups, individual citizens, national and local governmental regulatory agencies, as well as the public police (Jones and Newburn, 2006). Jones and Newburn (2006:6) continue, suggesting that there has always been an array of policing bodies however the last decade has seen a rapid increase in ‘visible’ policing providers. While Bayley and Shearing (1996) note that: ‘In the past 30 years the state’s monopoly on policing has been broken by the creation of a host of private and community-based agencies that prevent crime, deter criminality, catch law-breakers, investigate offences, and stop conflict. The police and policing have become increasingly distinct.’ It is this fragmentation or use of numerous agencies to uphold law and order within the community that Button refers to as pluralisation. Whilst we can say that policing bodies have been coexistent for some time; in recent years heavy financial constraints placed upon the public Police have forced a much larger, lateral, recruitment of private agencies to assist in back room and specialist Police departments. Newburn and Jones (2002) suggest that this may be due to: ‘Increasing constraints on police expenditure and that, as a consequence, other forms of provision have expanded to fill the gap.’ This largely came to the public eye in 1983 when the Home Office issued a circular (114/83, Manpower, Effectiveness and Efficiency) outlining the need for the Police force to demonstrate value for money in line with other public services (Smith and Henry, 2007:27 in Johnston, 1992). During the 1980’s Conservative administrations offered national police forces, financial incentives to, where possible, employ civilians in positions that did not require police power, training or experience (Jones and Newburn, 2002). This, however, is not a new concept, as explained by Jones, Newburn and Smith ((1994) in Jones and Newburn, 2002), ‘the employment of civilians in the police service has a long history, dating back to the early stages of this century’. Changes forced by financial shortages are highlighted by Houghton (2012), suggesting that due to budget constraints policing bodies have been forced to look at radical options such as privatisation as opposed to more common measures previously used like a minimum rate of change. Chief Superintendent Phil Kay was quoted in the Guardian (2012), as overseeing the joint West Midlands/Surrey â€Å"transformation† programme, designed to deal with the challenging financial conditions the force currently faced. As part of the programme West Midlands and Surrey constabularies intend to out source a variety of policing activities such as investigating crimes, developing cases, managing intelligence, as well as more traditional back-office functions, such as managing forensics, finance and human resources. In 2010/11 the Police Officer training course profile consisted of a 95 day course followed by three further 5 day interventions over the full 2 year probationary period. The total cost of training a police officer under this model was estimated at  £16,694 (the Met, 2011). These figures are in addition to a starting wage in the region of  £28,000 –  £32,000 per annum, housing allowance, contributions to private health care, free eye tests/spectacles and a London based Police Officer could expect to receive an additional  £6,500 per annum (The Met, 2012). In 2009-2010,  £1 from every  £7 of tax paid in England and Wales was used to pay a Police pension (The Telegraph, 2012). It is difficult to determine an accurate figure as to the raw cost of just one Officer per annum. However, when you begin to assess a similar monetary breakdown for a private contractor conducting a policing activity, such as a public space CCTV operator, the costs are poles apart. Individuals can complete a 30 hour course that will impart sufficient specialised knowledge for the user to be deemed competent and ‘possess the legal and technical expertise to operate CCTV systems according to the latest industry standards and the BS standard’, for a cost of approximately  £150 (AAB Training, 2012). Following the introduction of the Private Security Industry Act in 2001, to legally operate CCTV within a public space, operators must hold a current SIA licence, available at a cost of  £220 (SIA, Home Office, 2012). In a recent paper the Home Secretary, Right Honorable Theresa May MP (2010), claimed that: ‘Spending on the police has increased by 24% in real terms since 2000/01 and stands at  £13 billion a year today. Over the past decade the focus on public spending has been on money rather than value for money†¦ Government and police forces have wasted money.’ In the UK, Police are continually trying to ensure that there is a â€Å"visible presence†, a member of the uniformed police, on the streets. However in 1985 Bayley documented that in the United States of America, due to ‘staffing and deployment rules, 10 additional officers must be hired in order to get one extra uniformed police officer on the streets around the clock throughout the year’ (Bayley 1985, as cited in Bayley and Shearing, 1996). They continue to state that the incremental cost of a unit of â€Å"visible presence† on American streets is, therefore, about $500,000 – 10 times a patrol officer’s average annual salary plus benefits (Bayley and Shearing, 1996). More recently in the UK financial constraints on the public Police have resulted in numerous cases of ‘outsourcing’ of back room and support staffing from the private sector. G4S have won several contracts to support the Police including a support services contract with the Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Constabularies. Managing Director of G4S Policing Support Services, John Shaw states: ‘Clearly in these times of austerity forces are investigating alternative ways of delivering the support services that underpin effective and efficient police operations and we are confident that by working with G4S the three forces will be able to make considerable savings which they will be able to redirect to frontline policing (G4S, 2012)’. ‘Many UK forces face budget cuts and had considered outsourcing work to save cash and bridge a 126 million pound funding gap.’ (Reuters 2012). As we can see, budgetary constraints have forced the public Police to investigate various options in order to maintain society’s persistent desire to see the Police force ‘policing’, as in on the streets. This need to reassess and outsource has naturally left a ‘grey area’ in the classification between the state, tax funded, public Police force and commercial, private policing bodies. Loader’s (2000) theory, that this shift in approach, ‘Police to policing’, is a transformation. He describes policing bodies that range from Government Police, through to ‘hybrid’ agencies, government provided services including CCTV monitoring etc. etc. (Loader, 2000, as cited in Mazerolle and Ransley, 2005). In 2003, following a Government Green paper, Policing: Building safer communities together (Tim Newburn, 2012), the first key, high profile, ‘hybrid’ style organisation designed as an integral support unit to the Police was formed. Whilst the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) was created and is funded by the central Government it remains operationally independent of the Police. Again a ‘grey area’ emerges as recruitment is often from within the various established Police departments, NCIS, NCS MI5. The emergence of such hybrid policing is one of the largest and least studied changes affecting law enforcement. Largely as a result of privatisation and contracting-out, Britain now has the following semi-private, semi-public bodies: the Atomic Energy Agency Police; the Transport Police; the Customs and Excise Investigation Division; the National Rivers Authority, the Post Office Investigation Department; and so on and on (The Economist, 1997). Whilst many see the ever increasing ‘privatisation’ of the public Police force and their roles, it is important to remember that this is not a new concept. Private security agencies have been assisting in law and order in the UK for centuries; many have come to rely on them, seeing them as an integral part of homeland security. The Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, recently stated that the future of policing should be based upon the principles set out by Sir John Peel, suggesting that ‘Public–private partnerships can be really important for the police, especially on things like new technology, and the police will need new contracts (The Telegraph, 2012)’. On one hand the continued employment of private sector personnel to conduct backroom and technical policing activities fulfills the need of Police Officers to be seen to be ‘policing’ however in doing so it fuels the fire for the pluralisation and ‘hybrid’ policing bodies that are becoming increasingly common throughout the UK. As Button suggests ‘Policing has become pluralized. Police are no longer the primary crime-deterrent presence in society; they have been supplanted by more numerous private providers of security (Bayley and Shearing 1996: 588).’ In conclusion, there are many things that have shaped and changed the way in which the Police force operate and the manner in which they uphold the law. However, the role of the Police Officer has changed dramatically over the years, the UK population has increased exponentially, they have faced severe manning and budgetary cutbacks, coupled with the rapid pace of evolving criminality, all of which have forced the Police to assess what are the core functions that cannot be filled by anyone other than a uniformed, lawful, Police Officer with powers of arrest. As a result out sourcing to experts and or backroom personnel is rapidly becoming the norm. In essence Button’s claim is true, due to financial constraints and social change, the public Police are no longer the primary policing force, more accurately it is a ‘hybrid’ of both the public Police assisted by numerous private and Governmental agencies. References AAB Training, (2012), ‘CCTV Training Courses’, http://www.aabtraining.co.uk/security_training/cctv_training.php, (Accessed 30th October 2012) Button, M. (2002) Private Policing, Cullompton: Willan David H. Bayley; Clifford D. Shearing (1996), ‘The Future of Policing’, Law & Society Review, Vol. 30, No. 3, 585-606 G4S (2012), ‘Electronic monitoring for Scottish Government’, http://www.g4s.uk.com/en-GB/Media%20Centre/News/2012/09/21/Electronic%20monitoring%20for%20Scottish%20Government/, (Accessed 17th October 2012) G4S (2012), ‘History’, http://www.g4s.uk.com/en-GB/Who%20we%20are/History/, (Accessed 17th October 2012) G4S (2012), ‘Police outsourcing statement’, http://www.g4s.uk.com/en-GB/Media%20Centre/News/2012/08/22/Police%20outsourcing%20statement/, (Accessed 17th October 2012) John Houghton, (2012) â€Å"The â€Å"not so new† plans to privatise policing†, Safer Communities, Vol. 11 Iss: 4, 191 – 194 Les Johnston (1992) in David J. Smith and Alistair Henry, (2007), ‘Transformations of Policing’, The Trajectory of Private Policing, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd Loader, (2000), From Police to policing: transformation and pluralisation, in L. Mazerolle and J. Ransley (2005), ‘Third Party Policing: Cambridge’, 19 Reuters (2012), ‘West Midlands police latest to axe outsourcing plans’, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/22/uk-britain-police-outsourcing-idUKBRE8AL0BB20121122, (Accessed 22 November 2012) Security HR (date unknown), ‘Public Police and Private Security’, Impact of Blurred Boundaries on Accountability ‘Gap’, http://www.securityhr.co.uk/Private-Security-and-Public-Police-Blurring-Boundaries.pdf, (Accessed 19th October 2012) SIA, Home Office, (2012), ‘Public Space Surveillance (CCTV)’, http://www.sia.homeoffice.gov.uk/Pages/licensing-cctv.aspx, (Accessed 30th October 2012) The Economist, (1997), ‘Welcome to the new world of private security’, http://www.economist.com/node/86147, (Accessed 30th October 2012) The Guardian (2012), ‘Police Federation vice-chairman says privatisation could destroy service’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/03/police-federation-vice-chairman-warn ing, (Accessed 19th October 2012) The Metropolitan Police Force (2011), ‘Directorate of Human Resources’, http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/disclosure_2011/may/2011040001974.pdf, (Accessed 19th October 2012) The Metropolitan Police Force (2012), ‘New Constable’, http://www.metpolicecareers.co.uk/newconstable/pay_and_benefits.html, (Accessed 29th October 2012) The Telegraph, (2012), ‘Police pensions unaffordable as tax payer contributions near 2Bn’, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/9110995/Police-pensions-unaffordable-as-taxpayer-contributions-near-2bn.html, (Accessed 29th October 2012) The Telegraph, (2012), ‘We don’t want private companies patrolling the streets’, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/9584002/Yvette-Cooper-We-do-not-want-private-companies-patrolling-the-streets.html, (Accessed 30th October 2012) Theresa May MP, (2010), ‘Home Office’, Policing in the 21st century: Reconnecting Police and the people, http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/consultations/policing-21st-century/policing-21st-full-pdf?view=Binary, (Accessed 30th October 2012) Tim Newburn, (2008), ‘Handbook of policing’, Policing since 1945, Willian, Second edition. 100 Treveor Jones and Tim Newburn, (2006), Plural Policing: A Comparative Study. Routledge, 1 Trevor Jones and Tim Newburn (1994), ‘The Transformation of Policing’, understanding current trends in policing, The Centre for Crime and Justice