Mexican Drug Cartels Why Are They So Horrible - 884 Words

Mexican Drug Cartels: Why are they so horrible? Drug Cartels are organizations of people of different backgrounds who manufacture drugs and join forces to beat any competition when selling their products, which consist of marijuana, cocaine, and stolen oil and other drugs (Ioan). They’ll stop at nothing to beat their competition, that means even if they have to kill or claim the lives of the innocent to get their way. They are mainly established in Mexico because of the corruptness of the country, ranging from law enforcement to government officials. NPR staff stated that â€Å"Over the past five years, the Mexican drug war has claimed the lives of an estimated 40,000 civilians and drug traffickers† (NPR staff). Cartels in and out of the US†¦show more content†¦They’ve started kidnapping people and holding them for ransom, but they end up executing them in the end . They’ve also increased their organizations by taking over the cities closes to the Mexican border so that they can increase their drug exports to the U.S more easily. Some of the states taken over by the cartels in Mexico are Tijuana and Sinaloa. Cartels’ assassinating someone in Mexico has become common in the Mexican news (Duff). It’s no surprise to the locals when they hear that more people have died at the hands of cartels. But the murders have had an impact on Mexican government officials and police officers. They’ve spread fear among the public and the government of Mexico with their gruesome murders that they broadcast on websites such as YouTube (Rosenberg). They make the victims confess about the affiliation they had with the cartels and what illegal activities they’ve taken part in while recording them, and they’re beaten and tortured to confess and then their executed after confessing. The cartels leave messages with the dead bodies for others to find to warn them about trying to get in their way (Rosenberg). One of the cartels that is best known for doing this is Los Zetas (Duff). They are the biggest cartel in Mexico and they are the most vicious when it comes to murders because of the way that they torture and then kill the victims. They kidnap the most people in Mexico and record

Abstract Somnambulism Free Essays

Somnambulism, commonly known as sleepwalking, is a parasomnia that has six diagnostic criteria that must be met according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV. It is marked by inappropriate physical behaviors that disrupt sleep. Upon awakening the individual is confused and has no memory of the episode. We will write a custom essay sample on Abstract Somnambulism or any similar topic only for you Order Now Sleepwalking peaks in childhood and usually resolves itself in adolescence. Adults that experience sleepwalking are more likely to have had episodes as children. The disorder is most prevalent in females during childhood and men in adulthood. Individuals with mood disorders such as anxiety or depression are more likely to present symptoms of somnambulism. Genetic predispositions are very important when determining whether an individual will develop the disorder. However, it is essential to remember that environmental influences like stressful events are usually needed to galvanize the genetic predisposition. The use of medications can both trigger and correct somnambulism. Along with medications, hypnosis, and anticipatory awakening have also been shown to relieve the symptoms of sleepwalking. Somnambulism can be a dangerous disorder. While asleep individuals have been known to put their own lives, as well as the lives of others at risk. There have even been reports of a people who suffer from somnambulism committing murder while asleep. Courts have acknowledged the excuse of somnambulism to declare an individual innocent of their crime. However, this proposes several dangers. How are we supposed to control these individuals from committing another crime? Also, there have not been enough studies on successful treatment, so how will we know that these individuals will be corrected with treatment? It seems as though the consequences for crimes committed while sleepwalking are inadequate. Somnambulism and the Dangers Sleep disorders are separated into two categories, parasomnias or dyssomnias. Dyssomnias are those that produce extreme sleepiness or difficulty in initiating or maintaining sleep. Parasomnias are those inappropriate physical behaviors that happen during sleep. Somnambulism, or more commonly sleepwalking, is a parasomnia. What do you picture when you think of a person sleepwalking? Waking up in the middle of the night and aimlessly without consequence aimlessly walking around their room? I bet you didn’t think of a person committing murder. The latter is the least known aspect of somnambulism. This paper will address the dangers, and consequences of somnambulism and whether these consequences are appropriate. According to the authors of the DSM IV, to be diagnosed with somnambulism the patient must meet six specific criterions. The individual must have multiple episodes of rising from bed during sleep. Since sleep walking episodes occur during slow-wave sleep, the somnambulism must take place during the first third of the night (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). During the incident the individual will have reduced alertness and responsiveness (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). They will also don a blank stare and be unresponsive to the efforts of others to wake them up (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Upon awakening the individual will not remember the events from the night before and will suffer from confusion and disorientation (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). However, after the confusion and disorientation the individual will regain full cognitive processes (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Most importantly, the sleepwalking must cause some sort of distress and or impairment in different aspects of their life (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Sleepwalking cannot be diagnosed as the formal diagnosis if it is due to substance use or medical conditions (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). The individual must meet all of the criteria above to be properly diagnosed as an individual with somnambulism. ree because they were sleepwalking. More precautions need to be taken before somnambulism can be used as an excuse for murder. How to cite Abstract Somnambulism, Papers

Choose two scenes from Romeo and Juliet and comment on how Zeffirelli and Luhrmann tackle them differently Essay Example For Students

Choose two scenes from Romeo and Juliet and comment on how Zeffirelli and Luhrmann tackle them differently Essay Choose two scenes from Romeo and Juliet and comment on how Zeffirelli and Luhrmann tackle them differently. In particular you should consider: Love Friendship Language Fate and rivalry Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare, written around 1598, has been shown in many different ways by separate directors. Each individual version fits the context in which it is used, changing over again the primacy of the text. While the contexts and dialogue can be changed considerably, these directors usually keep the universal themes of the play in mind love and loyalty, language, fate, rivalry and opposites. Two such directors are Australian Baz Luhrmann and Franco Zeffirelli. Luhrmanns interpretation of Romeo and Juliet was released in the USA in 1996, starring two already popular American actors as the leads. As well as being set in the 1990s Luhrmanns film is viewed by us as a modern audience, with all the ideas and opinions fitting this context. This can further change the whole meaning of the film, yet still contains the original themes. Act I Scene 5 of Luhrmanns interpretation of Romeo and Juliet fits well with the context in which it was made, yet keeps many important parts and doesnt change the primacy of the text. Luhrmanns version of Romeo and Juliet is set in a modern situation with guns, car chases and all the typical Hollywood-style moments that only appear in modern films. An example of this is the character Mercutio being a black, eccentric cross-dresser which was unheard of in Elizabethan England. Other, smaller aspects are changed as well, for example, the text is all kept the same but for small alterations such as the line, These drugs are quick, which actually appears much later in the play. These can often add good points to the scene, but Luhrmann fails when he misses out an entire soliloquy by Romeo at his meeting with Juliet the speech beginning, O doth she teach the torches to burn bright where he only includes the last two lines in the scene. This is a romantic and famous speech that was missed out for no apparent reason, not to an advantage. An interesting architectural point is that while the Capulet Mansion is modern in style, the grand staircase inside is of the Elizabethan era. This shows how Luhrmann has controversially mixed modern and older aspects in often quite random ways. Act I Scene 5 is a good example of directors adding their own elements to the scene, for example in the form of music. This plays a major part in Luhrmanns film and is an effective means of conveying moods and reflecting characters. Like the film, the soundtrack is very unconventional. It cleverly mixes various musical styles ranging from orchestral and choral works to electronics and mainstream pop. Luhrmann uses music for three different effects. Firstly, at the beginning of the scene there is a loud party situation with people dancing and lots of fast music. The song is Kym Mazelles cover of Young Hearts Run Free. This is an upbeat, positive song whose title exactly describes the meeting of Romeo and Juliet as young star-crossed lovers, yet in contrast the lyrics say that one should not be tied down to a partner and should run free. Inside the Capulets house the music changes to a slow, warm tune, Kissing You by British artiste Desree. This is a smooth sounding soul song, enhanced by the performers fitting voice, which works both as the primary sound and as a background to the sonnet delivered by Romeo and Juliet. The tune, however, is more fitting than the rather vague lyric and is orchestrated differently throughout the film as its recurring theme. At the end of this particular scene the same piece of music fully modulates into a minor key, which by definition is darker sounding and less romantic, fitting with the images of Tybalt as a contrast to the earlier, romantic section of the scene. This draws attention to the negative aspects of the scene, which go unnoticed in many other versions of the play as it is widely regarded as purely a love scene. Another way in which Luhrmann interprets this scene as his own is through the art of visual metaphor, for example props, costume and depictions of the natural elements. In Shakespeares text the party is a masked ball and Luhrmann does not change this. The characters are rather boringly dressed as complete stereotypes of their personalities, Juliet as an angel in white, Romeo as a knight in armour and Tybalt as a devil in red. This is very conventional of Luhrmann in what is regarded as such a daring film and doesnt do its reputation justice. The use of the natural elements plays a major part in Luhrmanns film. This is perhaps because the elements of humanity are recognised as love and hate, which are the two main themes of the entire play and so Luhrmann wants to reflect this in visual metaphor. At the beginning of the scene fireworks are being set off outside. They represent light and fire love is often seen as the light but is also a fiery emotion that can cause much destruction, so these are a good example of one of the two primary themes in this scene. The other is hate, coming from the character Tybalt and also from the age-old rivalry between the Capulets and the Montagues. Fire is also a sign of hell and the devil, which the theme of hate relates to entirely. Water is also commonly used in this scene, in the form of fountains, a swimming pool in the grounds and the meeting of Romeo and Juliet through the glass of a fish tank. Water symbolises safety, yet is used in this scene more as a counterbalance to the fire. It is seen as purifying and good, like love, yet can also be destructive in the form of natural disasters. These two elements both have good and bad points about them, like the emotions of love and hate in the play, but overall fire is the negative, dangerou s element and water is safe and pure. They are linked to the story in that water can put out a fire, as love conquers hate at the end of the play. However, these elements together eventually amount to nothing, as in the story, where the families might have been united in the end but they had both lost people dear to them in the process. The purpose of camera angles and the way the actors are shot can often dramatically change the way the audience subconsciously views the film. Luhrmann uses modern technology not available to his predecessors, such as underwater camera shots of Romeo. Romeo and Juliet also first see each other through a fish tank and are filmed through the glass with tropical fish swimming into view. This is slightly mysterious yet very modern. By the 1990s people were experimenting more with film shooting than in say the 1960s, as the technology had now been invented and there were so many new possibilities, and Luhrmann doesnt pass on this opportunity. Another interesting way in which this scene is filmed is during the dancing, when Romeo has taken the Ecstasy pill and it has begun to affect his brain. As soon as he takes the tablet there are clips of swirling lights and spinning fireworks to symbolise him spinning into a state of drug-induced euphoria. As the negative effects of the drug hit him, Romeo is filmed 360? with the camera spinning round him. This is a very modern technique, fitting with the context. The whole general filming is fast moving, just like the fast moving society in which we now live, where people do not often stop to reflect and everything has to be instant or on demand. Romeo and Juliet by Franco Zeffirelli is very different to Luhrmanns film adaptation of the same play. The main difference is that Zeffirellis version is set in Shakespeares original context of the 1590s. We can tell this from the costumes, the use of swords as opposed to guns and flick-knives and the use of music. Blood Brothers written by Willy Russell EssayThe use of silence as opposed to sound is evident again as there is almost a minute without any sound, then the wind and rain build up as if Romeo is beginning to realise fully what he has done. The music then changes to a Requiem piece which is dramatic and fits with the image of the Christ statue. Use of lighting is an important factor in Luhrmanns film, for example when Mercutio dies the dark clouds are beginning to come over and as Romeo shoots Tybalt the sky is almost pitch black. Nighttime is traditionally associated with evil and bad things which fits with the story. As the light dims, it is also as if the light has gone out on Romeos life because he has just committed cold blooded murder while thinking of Juliet. In contrast to Luhrmanns somewhat overdramatised interpretation for the modern audience, Zeffirellis 1960s Act III Scene 1 is a calmer, more orderly affair. The rivalry between the two groups seems less serious in general. The two groups are still wearing distinct separate colours which are a clear representation of sides, almost like an army uniform. This is almost saying they are not as serious, as used in the example of present day football hooliganism. The people that cause the trouble are not the fans in football colours with scarfs and rattles, they are the people dressed in different designer clothes who are less conspicuous and look for a fight. In Luhrmanns scene everybody wears normal clothes and there is no pattern obvious so this seems more real, whereas Zeffirellis actors are dressed noticeably the same in groups. This is another example of the formality involved in the original Shakespearean context and also of the 1960s era where people had set uniforms to wear for var ious occasions, more so than in the present day. However, when Tybalt takes off his outer clothing to fight he appears to be wearing much the same as Romeo. Mercutio is portrayed as a clown, washing and playing in the fountains at the scene. The water symbolises safety, as he is fine until he comes out of the fountain. He has blonde hair that contrasts Tybalts dark hair, as Tybalt is the bad character he wears dark colours that represent evil. The use of the crowd as background noise is recognised here and not in Luhrmanns. This is quite formalised but also shows that the rivalry is not as bitter as it is in Luhrmanns scene. At one point during the scene Mercutio makes a joke and Tybalt laughs with the rest of the crowd. They shake hands, which is the equivalent of meeting before a dual in a polite yet formal manner. This would never have happened in Luhrmanns film as the atmosphere is too hostile and physical distance between the characters was kept. This is because of the generation difference once again, Zeffirellis entire film was more ritualised and formal as it was in the 1960s and indeed the 1590s. Sounds play more of a part in Zeffirellis version of this scene than in Luhrmanns. Crowd noise is very important in adding to the excitement of the scene but also in holding back the tension. There is a group of men huddled around Tybalt and Mercutio as they fight, who laugh and shout things during this part of the scene. This is an example of the director changing the actual text by adding lines like, Hes drunk! Mothers babys lost his sword. These would definitely be present in the original context of the play, although not the text, where street brawls were commonplace and served more as entertainment to others than as real fights. Zeffirelli adds these lines effectively as they continue the less dramatic feel to the scene. Rather amusing is that when Romeo states that, Mercutios dead, the crowd sound mildly disappointed as if this were the end of their entertainment, not somebodys life. Then they start laughing again. This would be quite controversial at the time the film was made. Towards the end of the scene, however, when Romeo and Tybalt are fighting, the crowd get quieter as they realise the seriousness of the situation. This is the opposite of how Luhrmann tackled this part, as he builds up the tension to a climax where there is a lot of noise from the weather and music. The only sounds heard when Romeo kills Tybalt are that of a string orchestra playing long, drawn out minor chords. This is not music of that era as the main string section with celli and violins was not introduced until the Baroque period. Therefore Zeffirelli has mixed music styles as Luhrmann did in the same scene, purely to add variety. In this scene, however, music is mainly left out to allow the director to focus on crowd noise, perhaps because of a low budget. Unlike Luhrmanns interpretation of Act III Scene 1, the Zeffirelli version takes place entirely in the daytime. Where Luhrmann used special effects to sequence fast moving clouds and changing weather and times of day, Zeffirelli did not have these options. No computerised effects were possible at the time his film was made. While this is not a major difference on the Shakespearean stage the scenery on the inside roof would simply be changed to stars and moons as opposed to the sun it outlines quite a contrast between the two films. Luhrmanns scene starts out in the middle of the day at its hottest but as events unfold the sky gets darker and the weather gets worse. Zeffirellis version is entirely in the daytime which also takes away more of the dramatic element that is omni present in Luhrmanns. There are many similarities between Zeffirelli and Luhrmanns interpretations. For example, both include Mercutio climbing steps to die above the other characters. This is an interesting idea, probably lifted from Zeffirelli by Luhrmann when he made his later film. Certain aspects were taken better than others for each director, for example the use of the elements as visual metaphors were particularly effective and thought provoking in Luhrmanns first scene, but his Act III Scene 1 was overdramatised and as a result ineffective. Zeffirellis film was more suited to the original dialogue and, like Luhrmanns, kept the primacy of the text. Particularly effective was the representation of fate in such a formalised manner, as would have been true to the Elizabethan audience. Although both were controversial at the times, Luhrmann prides himself on it with it printed on the video box, they were sufficiently groundbreaking for their separate audiences to understand. However, for some people L uhrmann pushed the accepted boundaries for Shakespeare slightly too far and tried to disguise it with special effects. This is why Zeffirelli made the better Shakespeare film and Luhrmann the better Hollywood box office hit.