Stricter Laws on “Gun Control” free essay sample

In the state of Texas, a shooting took place on September 6, 2013. A 46 year-old man, who was identified as Brian Cloninger, shot an 8 year-old African-American, Donald Maiden Jr. , in the face. Prior to the shooting, Cloninger was seen waving his gun at people (Edwards). This incident and other similar incidents enraged our nation and have bought to citizens’ attention about how laws covering the sale of firearms should be made stricter. Too many people with mental illnesses are being allowed to buy firearms, and this problem only seems to be getting worse. Gun control is one of the biggest social issues at this moment, and yet guns are still getting in the wrong hands because laws for background checks are not as strict as they should be. Gun laws on background checks should be stricter, because guns are still getting unto the hands of mentally unbalanced people. Background checks will prevent the mentally unstable to be able to buy guns easily. We will write a custom essay sample on Stricter Laws on â€Å"Gun Control† or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page When 46 year-old Brian Cloninger shot 8 year-old Donald Maiden Jr. , he had no motive for shooting the poor kid in the face. When asked if he shot 8 year-old Donald in the face by a witness; Cloninger said â€Å"Yes I shot that kid in the face† with no remorse in his attitude. Brian Cloninger could have a mental illness because no one, but absolutely on one, would shoot an 8 year-old boy in the face ever. A person would have to be mentally ill to commit such a crime against an innocent 8 year-old boy, but there will always be individuals like Cloninger that are unstable to think normally. A similar case that happened in Washington, D. C was due to an emotionally defanged person owning a gun. A former navy reservist killed 12 people in a mass shooting at a secure military facility. After the gunman was killed by authorities, the gunman was identified as Aaron Alexis, 34, who was working for a military subcontractor (Miller). Aaron Alexis thought he was being bombarded by low-frequency microwaves and also reported hearing voices (Miller). It is clear that Alexis was showing symptoms of untreated or undertreated paranoia. If these similar incidents keep on happening innocent people are going to keep dying because mentally ill people cannot be  responsible for a gun. Of course, making the laws stricter won’t stop all the gun violence that is happening, but if stricter laws on background checks mean that it is going to be harder for mentally unstable people to have access to guns, it will affect the amount of gun related crimes. This incident and other similar incidents have happened frequently and are still happening. Almost every week I hear about a shooting incident on the news that occurred at schools, colleges, or streets. I would say most of the shooting incidents occurred in schools where innocent little kids are shot. For this reason, firearms need to be restricted from people that cannot be responsible for possessing a gun. Easy availability of guns encourages gun use. Individuals with criminal backgrounds and mental health issues should not have easy access to guns. Children, especially, should not have access to guns. Individuals who own guns should be required to secure them with trigger locks or other devices. People who own guns should also be required to have training in the safe use of firearms as a condition of ownership. Having better gun control laws could help reduce incidents like this. Some people might not agree that having stricter gun control laws will decrease the amount of gun crimes going on in the world. People against stricter gun control laws might say that, for criminals that commit gun crimes and break laws, will always find a way to get their hands on a gun. They will get the guns illegally even if gun control becomes stricter. Strict gun control laws will only take away guns from those who need them to protect themselves. Background check laws will not prevent people from buying guns. People that do not have a mental illness or criminal records will be fine with purchasing a gun and therefore can protect themselves and their family. Someone against these stricter laws might also say the vast majority of violent crime in the United States (and the rest of the world) only occurs in areas that have excessive gun control laws; thereby denying law-abiding citizens the ability to protect themselves. Of course, stricter laws for gun control won’t reduce all the gun crimes going on, but it will be harder for mentally unstable people to have access to a gun. The advocates against gun control seem to be closed minded in their opinions. It is bit misleading in suggesting gun control won’t reduce to some extent gun violence. People break laws, but fewer people will shoot up a place, if they did not have access to a gun in the first place. Crime will decreases as the penalties and oversight of gun increases. If you go to jail for twenty years for illegally buying an assault rifle, then that is an obvious disincentive to doing the action. There are, however, gun supporters that feel that there are enough restrictions on gun control. The NRA, National Rifle Association, is against background checks and remains the main obstacle in changing gun laws. â€Å"What gun control proponent are trying to do is close the so-called gun show loophole,† which allows many private purchases, many of which occur at gun shows, not to have undergo federal background checks. Any purchase by a federally licensed dealer-whether at a store or at show- must undergo such a cheek† (Bohn). Bohn states that The Law Center of Prevent Gun Violence estimates 40% of gun purchases in the U. S. each year are through private sales, the ones that do not undergo background checks. These are a few reasons why guns are still getting into the wrong hands. One reason is because private purchasers do not go through a background check. To push against stricter laws background checks the NRA even handed out flyers saying â€Å"NO to ‘Universal’ Background Checks†. By doing so the NRA is gaining members who are going against stricter laws on background checks. Stricter background checks will decrease the gun crimes that are committed by dangerous people like mentally ill people and criminals. The deadliest weapons should be regulated. America has proven time and time again that they can no longer uphold to the amendment, and all the foolish murders, all because there was a gun available at hand.

Rankle

Rankle Rankle Rankle By Maeve Maddox A reader declares: I rankle Or get rankled when I hear someone, usually, an athlete, is under rated. What does this mean? The question asks about the term underrated, but this post will focus mainly on rankle. First, the verb underrate: underrate: to estimate at too low a value or worth. Ex. Research shows men tend to overrate themselves and women underrate themselves. Further explanation of underrate does not seem necessary. The reader is correct in the observation that the term is frequently used in reference to athletes. For example, a Google search brings up several lists of â€Å"the most underrated sports figures†: 10 Most Underrated Athletes of All Time The 25 Most Underrated Sports Superstars of All Time The List: Underrated all-time athletes 10 of the most underrated sports stars of all time The 5 Most Underrated Athletes The 25 Greatest Underrated NBA Players of All Time Now, to rankle. Taken into English from Old French, the verb rankle initially meant â€Å"to fester† or â€Å"to suppurate.† A wound that rankled was in the process of rotting. Over time, the word has dwindled in figurative use to mean to annoy or to irritate. Rankle conveys a sense of ongoing emotional hurt or bitterness. The verb may be used transitively or intransitively. Here are examples of current use: After less than three months on the job, LePage has already managed to rankle more constituencies with his bluntness than any Maine governor in recent memory.- Deseret News Christie’s Cowboys Support Rankles Some New Jersey Residents- Wall Street Journal My father didn’t get his due. That still rankles.- Shadaab Khan $10 bill change rankles descendant of Alexander Hamilton- New York Times [Rod] Serling was not just another freelancer and he rankled at the perceived affront to his work- Jeannot Szwarc Are you rankled by your cankles? A new liposuction treatment may help- Daily Mail Note: The word cankle is a new one on me. Word flags it as a misspelling. Cankle does not appear in the OED or on the Ngram Viewer, but Merriam-Webster offers a citation from The Philadelphia Inquirer dated 2001 and defines cankle as: a wide, thick, or fat ankle that appears indistinguishable from the lower calf. Cankle is a portmanteau: calf + ankle. As for rankle, It’s a good word to convey a festering annoyance of long duration. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Vocabulary category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:30 Synonyms for â€Å"Meeting†Hyper and HypoUsing Writing Bursts to Generate Ideas and Enthusiasm

Women Needed Consider a Career in Trucking

Women Needed Consider a Career in Trucking Take a closer look at the faces behind the wheels of our nation’s trucks and you may notice a growing change- women truckers! This welcome addition to our nation’s professional trucking workforce comes at the perfect time, as more drivers are retiring than are getting into truck cabs and a shortage of qualified drivers threatens the industry. AllTruckJobs.com helps shed some light on an exciting new career option for women. Although the overall percentage of truckers who are women is still relatively low, this is a positive trend, and one that hopefully will continue to grow in the coming years. And there’s every reason to believe it will, thanks to the proactive efforts of such organizations as Women in Trucking (WIT), and trailblazing women such as Caitlin Welby, CEO of RFX global trucking; in addition to breaking industry boundaries for women, they’re helping to change the perception that trucking is bad for the environment- an important consideration f or many young job hunters entering the workforce.If you’re a woman who’s considering her options for her next job, don’t let stuffy traditions and outdated modes of thinking limit your options. Explore the world of professional truck driving- it just might lead to your next great job!Fresh Faces in Trucking: Solutions to Driver ShortagesRead More at www.alltruckjobs.com

Is There an Inherent and Morally Required Connection Between Love and Essay

Is There an Inherent and Morally Required Connection Between Love and Sex - Essay Example The paper provides a brief philosophic discussion of what love and sex are and reevaluates the significance of the love-sex connection in philosophy. Keywords: sex, love, philosophy, connection, morality. Is There an Inherent or Morally Required Connection between Sex and Love? Philosophy is one of the most interesting sources of information about reality and life. Philosophy provides a unique channel for self-reflection and analysis of the most controversial aspects of the social, economic, and cultural reality. The value of philosophy is not only in the questions it raises but in the answers it provides and the analytical and systematic nature of the philosophic method (Halwani, 2010). It would be fair to say that philosophy reacts to the emerging issues, to understand their nature and provide possible solutions. The topic of sex and love has long been a matter of hot philosophic debate. Most world religions, especially in the western world, treat sex without love as inacceptable a nd immoral. In the meantime, the postmodern world is moving toward greater rationality in all life decisions, including sex. Sex provides physical pleasure and creates an atmosphere of intimacy, for which many people long. In the postmodern reality, there is no required connection between love and sex; there is nothing immoral in pursuing sexual desire, if it is mutual; love can add intensity to sexual relations but it is not mandatory in physical contacts among humans. Humans consider themselves as higher creatures. They have mind, cognition, and language which no animals have. They also have a unique capacity to be in love and love others. This is why love is often believed to be a mandatory component in the sexual relations among humans. However, the connection between love and sex is not simple but multidimensional. It involves a broad range of feelings, from pure sexual desire, to the feeling of victory, intimacy, and love. In the postmodern world ruled by rationality and reaso n, love gives place to other mundane considerations, and sex without love is no longer considered immoral. Yet, to clarify why the connection between love is neither required nor relevant, we first need to understand the nature of love and the philosophic implications of sex and sexual desire. Sex remains one of the most controversial aspects of philosophy, morality, and ethics. Thousands of people keep to a belief that sexual desire is immoral, if it is not linked to attraction and love. Others claim that sex is empty without feeling. Whatever the reason, the nature of sex, especially plain sex, in philosophy raised different interpretations. Basically, sexual love was always considered as inferior to platonic love (Goldenberg et al., 1999). The latter presupposed that people who engaged in sexual intercourse had greater moral goals, namely procreation, and based their sexual desires on the constant exchange of other, non-sexual beliefs, interests and experiences. Religions in all parts of the world supported this view, trying to equate the nature of chastity with the meaning of virtue (Goldenberg et al., 1999). In the non-western world, sex is favored and desired in marriage but not beyond it; Indian and African cultures treat sex as an indispensable component of people’s daily lives. At the beginning of the postmodern era, sex has acquired new philosophic coloring, being both the

How does a post colonial reading of Jane Eyre expose the authors deep Essay

How does a post colonial reading of Jane Eyre expose the authors deep anxiety regarding the idealogy of imperialism - Essay Example Jane’s Experiences The character of the protagonist Jane Eyre is the center of a struggle that is purely based on class. As an orphan, Jane suffered the consequences of poverty even though she is educated. Getting meager income from being a governess, she found herself in a low social standing -- hence, powerless. As a woman, she also experienced the vicious treatment from men in a patriarchal society (Morris, 1999). Due to these experiences, Jane identified herself with the millions in fervent yet in silent revolution against such inequalities. By studying her dialogues, it can be observed that Jane compared herself to a champion for the slaves who struggled hard for the attainment of freedom and the eradication of oppression, in a very indirect way. In her own terms, she fought against the notion that men are superior to women, and attempted to subdue that men's unjust treatment towards the women can always be justified. Although Jane acknowledged the fact that the social an d economic as well as cultural inequalities are realities that she needed to embrace, she remained firm in her belief that a time will come when ‘people will be liberated from such hell-like conditions’ (Glen, 1997). A feminist in her own right, Jane remarked: Women suffer from too rigid a restraint, too absolute stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow-creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making puddings and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano and embroidering bags. It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for their sex. (Dunn & Bronte, 2001, p.99) Britain’s Colonial Rule The Victorian era marked Britain’s international expansion of power, wealth and culture. The empire, which included India, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, Hong Kong Gibraltar, Rhodesia and several islan ds in the West Indies and various colonies in the African coast, was the biggest in the world during the period. Generally, the prevailing attitude of the British about the view that the English was destined to rule the world and that they had the supreme responsibility to instill culture to the ‘uncivilized’ was a key factor in its exploration and subjugation of peoples. This was heavily examined by Bronte, which can be gleaned from her works particularly in Jane Eyre (Berg, 1987). Although the author distanced herself on the issue of the Transatlantic Slave Trade, she still tackled slavery in some of her works. In the novel, Jane eventually inherited the wealth of her uncle which was derived from Madeira, a fictitious British colony. In an honorable manner, she divided the amount and the estates she obtained among her cousins. However, it should be pointed out that because of this inheritance sourced from slave colonies, Jane obtained the freedom that she longed for ( Bell, 2008). Mr. Rochester, Jane’s husband, was depicted to have worked and found his fortune in the West Indies. There, he found himself attracted to a half-Creole and Jamaican-raised Bertha who he saw

The Success of the First Crusade

The Success of the First Crusade The first crusade was a military expedition by European Christians to regain the holy lands and occurred in 1095. It was viewed as an unprecedented success by historians of the day and by contemporary historians. The reasons for this great success, if it can be named great at all, are numerous. From Pope Urban IIs fiery call to arms at the Council of Clermont, to the lack of preparation from the Turks, there are many reasons for this success. Indeed the extreme faith displayed by the crusaders, the quality of their leaders, and the allies which they gained during their extensive journey were further factors which contributed to their success. After receiving the call for military aid from Alexius I, the Byzantine Emperor in 1095, Pope Urban II seized upon this opportunity for him to renew Papal control and influence in the east and to reunite the churches of Rome and Constantinople. Through his highly charismatic sermon given on 27th November 1095 at the Council of Clermont, Urban was able to arouse enthusiasm from the clergy and nobles present for a Holy War on the Muslims in the east. They then went out to their diocese and spread the command of a call to arms from God. This call to arms created a huge influx of people from all works of life and they were all keen to embark on this pilgrimage to the holy land. This was a good thing as more people would mean a larger army for which to defeat the Muslims with. However a lot of people who showed enthusiasm for this pilgrimage were not knights or trained soldiers but were ordinary men, women and children, and so they can be seen as more of a hindrance than of help. On the o ther hand, by there being women, usually wives, on the journey they would have undoubtedly helped the men on this hazardous journey by providing them with the necessary motivation needed to complete this pilgrimage. However the crusaders did not answer the call for arms from Pope Urban likely; they knew that it would be an arduous journey. But for most it was their undoubted faith which made them embark on this journey and it was faith which was a key factor that carried them to Jerusalem. Until recently it has been thought that one of the main motives for people embarking on the crusade was power and profit which could be gained in the supposedly lucrative east. But contemporary historians now believe that a lot of the crusaders were just devout Christians and wished to secure their place in heaven which the Pope had stated would happen if they liberated Jerusalem from the infidel. Faith is a powerful tool; it can make people push beyond their limits and to achieve unattainable goals, as is stated by Setton and Baldwin ‘without zeal and a burning faith it could never have been achieved and hence it was definitely a positive factor in helping the success of the crusaders. The crusaders wer e from all different parts of Europe and spoke many different languages. It was their belief in achieving the one aim of capturing Jerusalem that made them work effectively together as a fighting force. This can be seen when the crusaders captured Antioch. As soon as they captured Antioch, after a gruelling siege of seven months, the crusaders themselves were besieged by an army of Kerbogha of Mosuls. The crusaders were hungry and tired. Furthermore their morale was dangerously low, they were fighting night and day to keep the besiegers out, and just when they thought that all was lost a minor monk called Peter Bartholomew claimed to have discovered the holy lance in the city. This was enough of a sign to give the crusaders faith that they would win and made them fight on. On June 28th they defeated Kerboghas forces. This is a prime example to prove that it was their faith which encouraged the Crusaders to go forth and to face the enemy head on instead of giving up. The first crusaders were indeed many but they were in foreign lands, far away from home and without a reliable source of supplies and so it was important for them to make allies within the region. Though there were some troubles between the crusaders and the Byzantines, the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I was very willing to help the crusaders with supplies, a small military force and engineers. The engineers were extremely useful and necessary for the building of siege engines from which they made the capture of towns much easier. Hence the alliance with Alexius was a necessity for the success of the crusade. A further asset to the crusaders was the help from the Armenians. With their help some of the crusaders were able to conquer Edessa and hence form the first of the crusader states called the County of Edessa of which Baldwin was their ruler. Also it was an Armenian guard who Bohemond bribed at Antioch to open the cities gates. Furthermore, it was also an Armenian commander who help ed the crusaders capture Jerusalem by surrendering his tower on the main walls to them. Otherwise the crusaders quite possibly would have had to have gone through a lengthy siege in which many of them would have died. Baldwin of Boulogne also had an Armenian called Pakrad on his staff whom he relied on for advice on the area and the diplomatic stance between states and rulers. Another main ally who the crusaders had but were not as prominent was the Christian people who were already there. They tried their best to help the crusaders by giving them what provisions they could spare and by trying to help overthrow the garrisons of towns of which the crusaders were trying to capture. But there is evidence that a lot of Christians within these Muslim states were quite content with their Muslim overlords and so were not keen in helping a foreign army even if it was a Christian one. Another key factor which can be seen during the first crusade is that of the competency of the crusaders leadership. The crusaders were in the hands of experienced princes whom had seen combat in various wars. This can be seen through the tactics which they employed, such as them used on June 30th 1097 when Bohemonds army was surrounded by a Turkish army. The papal legate Adhemar of Le Puy performed an ingenious diversion of crossing the mountains to flank the enemy and come up on their rear, ‘which caused them to flee in panic and confusion'[1]. But even though the crusaders leaders were highly skilled at leading they were not always a unifying force. There was a growing tension between Raymond and Bohemond. But other than that there was not much quarrelling within the army itself. Some of the main leaders were driven to a degree by their own ambition and this sometimes led to atrocities occurring. An example of this is the massacre of 300 Norman troops who Baldwin of Boulogne had forced to camp outside the walls of his newly captured town of Tarsus because he did not trust them and hence they were slaughtered by the towns former garrison under nightfall. But through all of the bad decisions, most of the time when they were needed to unify and attack together they did just that. They worked as one army, even if they disagreed on tactics when they assaulted and besieged major cities such as Antioch and Jerusalem. Indeed the assault on Jerusalem was impeded time wise by the arguing between the leaders over who should be given Antioch, but when they eventually got there the remaining princes worked together to gain success. But the fact that most of the princes true ambitions lay in their own personal gain is shown by Bohemond who selfishly never took any further part in the crusade after becoming Prince of Antioch. He never even went to Jerusalem. This was a major reason in why it took so long for the crusaders to take Antioch, because Raymond had wanted t o storm the city but Bohemond refused and wanted to besiege it even though there wasnt enough troops to encircle the city. Bohemonds decision to siege was due to his own greed; he wanted Antioch for himself and so wanted it intact. The siege was perhaps harder on the crusaders than the defenders as they quickly ran out of food which led to desertion and cannibalism. Even though these blasphemous events were occurring, Bohemond still held the siege which shows that he didnt care much about the religious side to the crusade but by taking Antioch he did succeed in completing his own agenda and furthered the crusaders cause. One of the most important reasons for the success of the first crusade was the disunity within the Muslim nations in and around the holy land and their underestimation of the threat to which the crusaders posed. During the time of the first crusade, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, and Egypt were all under Muslim control. But they were politically and, to some extent, culturally fragmented and hence this would have certainly contributed to the success of the first crusade. These differences can be seen through the internal rivalry which had been going on between competing territories. Anatolia and Syria were controlled by the Sunni Seljuks, and used to be unified in one big empire but in 1092 Malik-Shah, the Seljuk sultan, died and his sons quarrelled over who would succeed him. So the sultans once large empire was split between the competing sons. Hence when the crusaders came marching through, these states were on the whole more concerned with consolidating their own territories and gai ning control of their neighbours, than with cooperating against the crusaders. There was also a failure to react quickly enough to the crusading threat by the Turks and the rest of the Muslim states. During the Peoples crusade The Turkish king Kilij Arslans capital, Nicaea was situated close to where the crusaders were based. He was happy enough to watch them ravage the countryside but as soon as they threatened his city he easily defeated them. This easy defeat of the Christian forces lulled him into a false sense of security. When he heard that another Christian force had amassed at Constantinople he assumed that it would be of the same type of incompetent soldiers as before and so took the majority of his army to attack a rival state, ‘he had not foreseen that the crusading army would be so strong'[2]. This same sort of misconception of the crusading forces was common among many of the Muslim leaders, and hence played a major part in the success of the first crusade. This can be proven by the failure of the second crusade. It contained around the same amount of people as the first crusade but by this time the Muslim leaders were more prepared and swiftly defeated the crusaders in two battles[3]. Even though the main reason for the success of the first crusade was the disunity between the Muslim states, all of the factors mentioned contributed to the crusades success. The crusaders allies played their part in helping the crusaders to succeed in their goals. Also the faith of the people played a major part. Their faith cannot be underestimated, it kept them going and forced them onwards to Jerusalem; it was their faith which stopped them from turning back even when they were dying from starvation and disease. It was ultimately their faith which drove them to succeed. Bibliography Asbridge, T. S. , The First Crusade: A New History,(London, 2004). Baldwin, M. W. ed. , A History of the Crusades Volume I: The First Hundred Years, (Philadelphia, 1958), pp. 177 343. Phillips, J. P. , The First Crusade: Origins and Impact, (Manchester, 1997). Phillips, J. P. , ‘Who Were the First Crusaders?, History Today 47:5 (Manchester, 1997), pp. 16-22. Riley-Smith J. , The Crusades: Idea and Reality 1095-1274, (London, 1981). Riley-Smith, J. , The First Crusade and the idea of crusading, (London, 1986). Rochester, R. W. , Military Operations in the First Crusade 1097-1099 A.D.,(Liverpool, 1955). Runciman, S. , The First Crusade, (Cambridge, 1980). Wolf, K. B. , ‘Crusade and Narrative: Bohemond and the Gesta Francorum, Journal of Medieval History 17 (Oxford, 1991), pp. 207-16. [1] M. W. Baldwin, ed. , A History of the Crusades Volume I: The First Hundred Years, (Philadelphia, 1958), p. 293. [2] M. W. Baldwin, ed. , A History of the Crusades Volume I: The First Hundred Years, (Philadelphia, 1958), p. 289. [3] J. Riley-Smith , The Crusades: Idea and Reality 1095-1274, (London, 1981), p. 14.

Becoming a Better Negotiator

Over the past 8 weeks there has been a lot that I have learned about myself as a person with inner reflection in my negotiation style. Negotiation is a skill that I thought people have to be born with. Although people can be born better suited with negotiation skills; the skill is also a craft that can be taught and learned. People must be able to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses and build off their strengths to become a better negotiator.Lewicki, Saunders and Barry (2011) state that while some people may look like born negotiators, negotiation is fundamentally a skill involving analysis and communication that everyone can learn. I think that the questionnaires that I took really amplified what I need to work on as a negotiator. Negotiation is a part of everyday life for everyone, in home life and in personal life and becoming a better negotiator can impact our lives positively in both. This paper will reflect and summarize what I learned about myself doing both questionnair es and how I plan on improving my negotiation skills using this class going forward.QuestionnairesThe first questionnaire is called The Personal Bargaining Inventory. This questionnaire helps clarify the perceptions of one’s self on different dimensions of negotiation; from how a person should or â€Å"ought† to negotiate, power and deception, cooperation and competition, and winning and losing. The second questionnaire is called Communication Competence Scale. This scale is a diagnostic tool to help one determine their level of communication competence.Communication competence is defined as the ability  to enact both appropriate and effective messages in any communication setting. The Personal Bargaining Inventory asked twenty three questions rating my own behavior and twenty seven questions rating people’s behavior in general, on a scale of 1-7, 1 being strongly uncharacteristic and 7 being strongly characteristic (Lewicki, Saunders, & Barry, 2009). Both of these questionnaires make you look at yourself and gauge how we feel about our own behavior in negotiation and communication.It also makes us reflect on how we believe others should act and behave in negotiation. These are both great exercises for someone to use if they want to figure out exactly what they need to work on to become a better negotiator. Some of the questions asked about ethics; such as lying to get what we want, taking advantage of someone, and being accountable about the things we say in conversation and in negotiation. One must be completely honest when taking these questionnaires. Both of these questionnaires helped me reflect on myself and what I think of myself.About MeMargaret J. Wheatley said â€Å"without reflection, we go blindly on our way, creating more unintended consequences, and failing to achieve anything useful†. I think these questionnaires help with my own personal reflection. I have always been told that I am antagonistic and this is somethi ng that I need to work on. These questionnaires only backed up that assessment. A couple of the questions in particular stuck out to me. I had to be honest with myself, which helped opened up my eyes and helped me realize this truth. In the Personal Bargaining Inventory question number 21 was eye opening; â€Å"in any competitive situation, I like to win. Not just win, but win by the biggest margin possible†.I ranked myself truthfully at a 7, strongly characteristic. I hate to lose. I don’t know of anyone that does, but I really hate it. I get a sinking feeling in my stomach when I lose, or team I root for loses. It affects my attitude and really upsets me. I love to win. They say a win is a win, but in negotiation concessions must be made. Keeping this behavior could end up hurting my negotiation strategies in life. I must be willing to compromise more.The second question came in the Communication Competence Scale, â€Å"generally, I think about how others might  i nterpret what I say†. I need to choose my words more carefully when dealing with people. I don’t usually think about what I say before saying it, and sometimes people may interpret those things negatively. These questionnaires really helped me reflect on myself as a negotiator and as a person. Everyone could benefit from using them.Get BetterAs seen above there is room for me to improve and become a better negotiator. We all should try and become more well rounded people in our lives, to become morally and ethically responsible as well as better negotiators. I believe that I can become a better leader in life and at work if I am able to become a better negotiator. I can do better for my family and I can do better for myself. There are ten best practices to use for negotiators. I will use these ten practices to improve my skills and craft my negotiation style. Those ten practices are the following:1.Be prepared. 2.Diagnose the fundamental structure of the negotiation. 3. Work the BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) 4.Be willing to walk away. 5.Master the paradoxes. 6.Remember the intangibles. 7.Actively manage coalitions. 8.Savor and protect your reputation. 9.Remember that rationality and fairness are relative. 10.Continue to learn from the experience.I have a real life experience that just happened to me that these ten practices would have helped me with. I had set up a meeting with a customer and I expected just to introduce myself to these guys and let them know that I was new to the area. I wanted to show face to them and let them know that I was here to help. Well that was part of what happened. These guys took me and put me in a conference room and asked me a million questions about my company and what I would do for them. I feel I did okay in this situation, but had I been able to prepare for this negotiation I might have done a  better job.Practice 1 and 10 are what I will take away the most from this to learn from. Had I k nown that this introduction would have been more than just that, I would have prepared better for some of the questions they asked. I am new to this position and I will be able to walk away from this experience with something to work on. I tried my best to keep all questions in a positive light and try and make the meeting as personal as possible. This negotiation was not for a contract, but more or less for an opportunity that could lead to one. I laid a lot of my cards out on the table to let them know that I wanted to build trust. There were three guys in the meeting.Two of them specifically said that all they cared about was price, while the third said, â€Å"I don’t give two (curse)’s about price, all I care about is what you are going to do for me, I care about service†. This helps me in the future going forward with these guys, being able to address what is the most important thing to them when it comes to doing business with me and my company. This custo mer has all the power and they know it. All I want to go out and earn their business. I am a vendor to them and there are other vendors that can offer the same services as I can, what can I do to earn their business? I need to make my experience personal with them and try and build a personal relationship. Building trust in negotiation is one of the biggest and most important things in business.Once I get the opportunity to build this trust and earn this work I can then go into the negotiation faze of an MRO contract. MRO stands for Maintenance, Repair and Operations. We write out these contracts for loyal customers that basically take the negotiation out of our work. We set the prices and the services provided for the customer that we don’t need to earn or negotiate, we need to basically â€Å"keep them happy† until the contract runs out. They are set for 5 years and are fair and rational for both us and the customer.If I am able to get to the point of a negotiation f or a MRO contract, it would look really good to my supervisors and I could become one of the youngest managers in our company. I must take a plan of action to see things from my opponent’s perspective and keep in mind the intangibles that go into negotiation. Leaders must be credible and trustworthy (Bednarz 2011). Learning to become a better negotiator and person would definitely make me a better leader for my family and my company.In conclusion, this class has taught me a lot about negotiation and myself in the process. There are steps and processes that anyone can take that can train and help turn this into a skill. Negotiation is not the easiest thing in the world to do. No one is born with the same personality, and negotiation is a skill (like sports or music) that can be born with in certain people. But like sports and music, negotiation is a craft that can be worked, learned, exercised and honed. We must always get ready and be prepared prior to a negotiation. We must also learn from all our negotiations in life so that we can get better.