Read these instructions carefully.
Your thread must be at least 200275 words. This range is a minimum requirement, and NOT a maximum limit. You may write as much as you need to make your strongest arguments. Although more is not necessarily better, it is reasonable that the best discussions are the ones that show the best evidence in support of the assertions.

Your thread must reflect critical thought. There are two philosophical reference points that form the basis for our government, and by extension, our governments role in securing our borders.  These are (1) the Holy Bible, and (2) principles of self-governance as expressed in our Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.  These principles were frequently articulated by our Founders and are provided for you in the document entitled American Founding Principles.  For every discussion topic, try to relate the course content to real-world applications with biblical perspectives and link back to at least one Founding principle. Also, a minimum of 1 source is referenced appropriately; cite any sources used.  More is better.

Using the 4 classical phases of disaster management, discuss how collaboration between public and private organizations can support phases one and two of the model. Choose a threat/hazard/disaster and describe the possible interactions and involvement of each organization. Consider specific agencies that could support desired goals. Be sure to link back to American Founding Principles as well references to the importance of private property in maintaining a balance of power between citizens and government (from the Balance of Power article).

Reference documents will be uploaded to the assigned writer.

You must write (2) replies of at least 140 words each to other classmates threads (file attached), and a minimum of 1 source is referenced appropriately for each reply. Note that both quantity and quality are important considerations when it comes to participation. For example, a message that says simply, I agree, does not constitute participation because it does not add anything of substance to the discussion.
In order to earn points, you must add something of substance to the discussion; this would consist of new ideas, your perspectives, pointed follow-up questions, etc.
Responding to a classmates post requires both the addition of new ideas and further analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order to move the conversation forward. Thus, the response post is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon initial posts to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced in the initial posts. As such, reply posts that merely affirm, restate or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous post(s) and fail to make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion will receive appropriate point deductions.

Title:        Trapped in a Vice: The Consequences of Confinement for Young People

Author:    Cox,  Alexandra L.

Publisher:  Rutgers University Press

Copyright Date:  2017,  219 pages

Class,
I would like for each of you to use the following headings in your critique/reviews.

Author Credibility:  In this section tell the reader what specifically makes this author(s) credible.  Do not simply tell me the author was a police officer for 25 years. This fact alone does not make one credible. If you do not feel the author is credible or you are unable to evaluate the credibility of the author, tell this to the reader.

Methodology:  Identify the data used by the author. What type of research is this, ethnography, case study, simple descriptive stats, qualitative or quantitative, or some other methodology.  Can this research be replicated by others? Is this research methodology scientific in nature? If you are unsure what “scientific Research is, then please review a stats or research methods book.

Book Summary:  A general summary of the book content.
Who Should Read: Who specifically should read this book and why? Is this book of any use to rank and file police officers. Is it of any use to anyone in the CJ system? If yes who and why/how. If it is of no use to the CJ field, tell this to the reader of your review/critique. If not CJ professionals, who may benefit from reading this book.  Do not tell me “everyone” working in the CJ field should read this book.

Strengths:  What specific strengths were noted in this book?  Was it well written? Was it well organized.  Identify any specific strengths found in the writing of the book.

DO NOT combine Strengths and Weaknesses

Weaknesses: What if any weaknesses did you note? Was the book poorly researched?  Was it poorly written or poorly organized.  Did the author use the wrong methodology.
Adds to the body of CJ Lit:  What does this book give us?  Is there anything new?  Is it just a rewrite of the same old info that can be found in any number of other books?  How does it add to the existing body of CJ lit.?

Publication Date: If the book is over 10 years old, please address this in your critique. How is this material relevant today?

Each review should contain each of the individual headings and address them as best as you can.  Do not merge Strengths and Weaknesses under one heading. I want these broke out under their own heading.

Expectations:

Mechanics, formatting and grammar
The student uses grammar, spelling and punctuation correctly without errors. 

Organization
The student presents the material coherently and logically following an outline with appropriate use of headings to include introductory and conclusion material. There is a transition between paragraphs and sections.

Content
The student fully develops and supports ideas with more than the required number of scholarly, peer reviewed, sources correctly cited and referenced.

Critical thinking
The student correctly displays at least three critical thinking skills by conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating the requested information

Title Page and Reference page are not included in the required 4 pages.

Stakeholder vs Shareholder theories have been an on-going debate. Many scandals in recent history such as Enron, WorldCom, Wells Fargo, and others, are often used as evidence that the shareholder theory encourages or at least opens the door for unethical decision-making. Stakeholder and shareholder theories are normative theories of social responsibility. Some business leaders argue there is very little if any difference to the two theories as both support social responsibility. Does shareholder theory encourage unethical business decisions? In what ways do the theories support social responsibility? How would one determine the stakeholder priority when making an ethical decision when competing needs of the stakeholders are apparent?

You will need to do an in-depth literary search on the topic in order to create a fully-developed response. You will need to include in-text citations and a references list for external references used in supporting your points for this question. You should have no fewer than 7 references for your response to this particular question, 4 of which must be from peer-reviewed sources. Use APA formatting where appropriate.