The Human Cost of an Illiterate Society by Jonathan Kozol points out the hardships that people go through on a daily basis because they are functionally illiterate. He describes the fact that many of these people vote blindly or do not vote at all, and if they could have voted based on what they read that we may not have had some of our past presidents in this country. He gives mind blowing statistics, including the 60 million people that are functionally illiterate in 1980, and first-hand quotes from some of those 60 million; but leaves too much up to the audience making his argument weak.
In this essay it will be shown how crime in this day and age is measured and to what extent the different methods are valid and drawing from this, how reliable such methods are. For the most part, there are 3 major or respected methods used by most countries in determining the nature and extent of crime. and from these methods it will be demonstrated that there is no accurate way of assessing crime in a "reliable and valid way" (Crime and crime prevention Module 1, 1 - 8). Although these methods of crime measurement all have the same objectives, the end results can differ a great deal. Each method of measure is accomplished by different institutions (Government, social/market research companies and independent companies) that, in turn, have their own methodologies and procedures of gathering information. A brief description of these methods will be portrayed and the various arguments for and against that are inherent with them. In doing so, it will be clear to the reader that these methods are far from clear and as such the emanating results are often blurred.
The three branches; the executive, the legislature and the judiciary of government, should be separate, unique and equal. There should be a clear separation between the people and functions of the legislature, executive and judiciary. As Montesquieu said “that each function should be exercised individually by three institutions; When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty, because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws to execute them in tyrannical manner. Again there is no liberty if the judiciary power be not separated from legislative and executive.”