Invasion of Privacy, Missouri Revised Statute 565.253

The invasion of privacy is considered a crime in many countries and these countries have set up laws to ensure that those who are involved in such acts are punished by the law. The severity of these punishments range from country to country with those who are found guilty being fined, while others are given jail sentences (Davidson & Bryant, 2001). Privacy laws in the United States have their origins in the British common law which protected individuals from only the interference with their lives and with their property. This came to be further developed in the United States with the institution of state laws and statutes which further expanded this crime to include the interference of the emotional well being of a person. With the coming of and the continuous development of mass media, there seems to be very little privacy being left to individuals and this has ensured that the current state privacy laws continue to evolve to make sure that the privacy of individuals are protected (Sullivan, 2010). In this paper, we shall discuss the development of privacy laws in the states of America with specific reference to the state of Missouri.

The Missouri Revised Statute 565.253 states that a person will have committed the crime of the invasion of privacy in the second degree if such a person deliberately views, films, or takes another person’s photographs without the latter person’s awareness or permission (Missouri Revised Statutes, 2010). Moreover, this crime will be said to have been committed if the person being filmed or photographed is in a state of nakedness or partial nakedness and if this person is in a place where he or she would anticipate a reasonable belief of their own privacy. Furthermore, this statute states that a person shall be considered to have committed the crime of invasion of privacy if he secretly takes photographs or films another person using a concealed camera or camcorder without the latter’s consent.

As stated above, the early development of privacy laws started with the British common law and the purpose of these laws was originally to protect individuals from interference with their lives and property. However, these laws were further developed to include the protection of the spiritual nature of man as well as his feelings and intellect. These laws were later broadened to include the right of a person to be left alone and property was further defined as comprising of all forms of possessions, both tangible and intangible. Some scholars believe that the historical common law concerning privacy can still be applied today especially in situations where the right to privacy cannot be clearly defined by the current laws (Thaemert, 2002). They believe that the common law is much broader than current laws and that it would be best if it were to be taken seriously in matters concerning privacy and not disregarded as it is today. Common law privacy torts are very rarely used today and in fact, they are not applicable in cases where the affected person is considered to be newsworthy despite the fact that they provide a broader range of options that the Fourth Amendment does.

In the United States, the protection against the invasion of privacy varies from state to state and the American constitution itself does not provide strong penalties against it. Some states have a high level of protection against the invasion of privacy while some are more relaxed and a suspect may get off the hook easily (Siegel et al, 2009). This is not the case with common law which not only protects the right of individuals to be left alone but it also ensures that their property if protected. The common law is more specific in its application because it protects an individual from the invasion of their privacy from both the government and private citizens (Clapman, 2003). The evolution of the current laws and statutes has been largely influenced by the advent of mass media all over the world and the hunger that many people have for sensational news. Most of this highly demanded news requires that those pursuing it invade the privacy of the individuals who they are targeting in order to get the information that they need (De Reza, 2002). It is in such cases that statutes such as the Missouri Revised Statute 565.253 comes in as a way of controlling such behavior in society as well as ensuring that the right to privacy of individuals is protected. State statutes are created to deal with specific issues concerning privacy and are not as generalized as those of the common law. This means that state statutes do not cover everything concerning privacy and they instead make people feel insecure in matters involving their privacy. It would therefore be better if common law were given a little more priority when making decisions in matters concerning the invasion of privacy.

Many changes have taken place in privacy laws from historical common law to the state laws that are mostly used today. Most of these changes have come about as government attempts to put a definition to the various types of privacy invasions (Judge, 2002). Furthermore, the emergence of the media in the world today has made it necessary to make privacy laws which depend on the specific situations within which such media has invaded the privacy of individuals (Elizabeth, 1998). This has not only made privacy laws more complex but it has also ensured that there is a very thin line between whether one has indeed invaded the privacy of an individual or not. These new laws have created a scenario where one is never certain of ever getting justice if one’s privacy has been invaded and in fact, they actually have the opposite effect to what they are intended to do (Volkert, 2005). This is unlike the historical common law which tended to tackle matters directly and often pointed out that a violation of privacy had occurred no matter what the circumstances were. Moreover, the laws against the invasion of privacy in common law were not very complex and this ensured that they got straight to the point without the need of getting into complexities which would distort the entire case.

There are many ways through which this statute can be changed to ensure that matters concerning the invasion of privacy are swiftly dealt with. The first thing that should be done is to ensure that the complexity of the existing statute is reduced so that the public can better understand them and in the process have more confidence in them. Furthermore, there should be equal usage of both this statute and historical common privacy laws to provide stability to the decision making in invasion of privacy cases. The statute should be made to cover a broader range of invasion of privacy crimes than it currently does in order to reduce the number of statutes that have to be instituted to cover the same type of crime. The statute should be meant not only to deal with crimes of invasion of privacy involving the use of modern technology but should also be used to deal with other types of similar cases. To do this, some features of the common law should be included within this statute to enable it to complement the evolving needs that people have to protect the little privacy that they have left to them. This statute should not only target individuals who commit this crime, but it should also target the government and other powerful institutions which invade the privacy of individuals within the state of Missouri. This will not only ensure the efficiency of the law when dealing with such cases, but it will also discourage many who would have committed this crime from doing it.

Adult Learners in Higher Education and Training

The adult learner who was interviewed is an adult male who is thirty six years old and is married with two children. He was born, has lived and worked in the city of Detroit all his life and says that he has no plans of moving away from his home city any time soon. He previously worked at the General Motors Company as a middle skilled worker until he was laid off four years ago at the height of the economic recession that is currently plaguing our country. Despite the fact that he worked for this company since leaving high school, as had his father and grandfather before him, he was among the first to be laid off and he is still quite bitter about the events that led to this. After spending the last four years doing odd jobs, he and his wife, who has a stable job, decided that it would be best for him to return to school to ensure that he has the education necessary to be able to get a more competitive job than he previously did (Kistler, 29 – 30). After securing a loan, he enrolled himself into an adult learning program and he admits that at first he found it very difficult to fit in the new atmosphere where he was in class with people his own father’s age. He states that it took quite an effort to get to accept these people as his classmates and commends their instructors for bringing into class activities which encouraged all the adult students, no matter their background to get to cooperate with each other.

The interviewee says that their instructors introduced class activities, which they referred to as ice breakers, whose purpose was to create an ideal environment which would enable adult students to get to know each other in an educational setting (Flint, 3 – 8). He states that these activities were a great way of getting to establish a common ground between himself and other students who were doing the same course and that they helped him a lot when the time came to cooperate with them. These ice breaking activities were often done especially when they began new classes, during the introduction of new topics or when new adult learning activities were about to be introduced in class. Each course he was undertaking had its own ice breaker activity to fit in with its specific situation but he states that the introductory part was similar for all the courses. During the introduction of the new courses which the adult students had enrolled themselves for, there were activities which were designed to encourage the students within the class to get to know each other so that in case of a need for them to work as groups, then there would be very little difficulty. Furthermore, these get to know each other sessions also had the purpose of ensuring that the adult students became more comfortable within the environment in which they found themselves. They also enabled the promotion of unity and group cohesion in the class.

Although at first many of the adult students did not take these activities seriously, they later came to realize just how helpful it was for their learning process (Frey, 21). Not only did it encourage group work within members of the class but it also promoted unexpected friendships among adults of different generations. Furthermore, it ensured that all the adult students were comfortable in their new environment and that they were more receptive of what their instructors taught them. As these activities continued to be done, there seemed to be an increase in the participation of students in class especially when compared to the first day in class where there was little or no participation from the students. These activities also encouraged the adult learners to form study groups whose aim was to set goals for each member to achieve as well as helping one another in specific areas of weakness. They helped the adult students realize that they all shared the same fears and that it would be best if they were to work together to ensure that they had gotten rid of such fears. An unexpected environment of cooperation was created within the class when the adult students realized that they had so much in common than otherwise. Many came to realize that they had come from the same background and that most of them had been victims of the economic recession which had either rendered them jobless, or it had made the services they had to offer redundant (MacArthur, 108 – 121).

The learning activities in which the interviewee participates were not the same as those which he participated in as a child. The reason for this is that while those activities of childhood were done in the form of games, those in adult learning have a seriousness which can only be attributed to maturity. He further states that he only participates in such learning activities because they are in no way childish and in fact, they are have been tailored to suit an adult learning environment and the strategies of learning which are involved in each course. As an adult learner, the interviewee states that he has encountered quite a number of problems or barriers in his learning process. He states that since he had been away from school for almost eighteen years, it was very hard for him to get back into the mood for learning. Furthermore, he found that the learning process was much altered from what he had previously known because of the new technology being used in class. He has had to redevelop his skills in swift note taking, concentration, and the fast and efficient use of the new technology which is available to him in class. When asked to summarize his experiences as an adult learner, he says that although in the beginning he had a hard time getting to learn within a new environment, the learning activities as well as his quick learning abilities have helped him come a long way towards achieving his goals.

Human Communication

Human communication is very important in the interaction between people within the society and in fact, it is the glue that holds the society together. Without communication, all other elements of society such as religion, government, culture, and organization would be non existent. Instead, there would only be chaos as everybody tried to fend for themselves without any concern for others. Communication is therefore very important for all human societies to function effectively and it has even become more important today due to globalization which has forced people to start communicating across cultures as opposed to when people only used to communicate within their own cultures.

Cultural relativism propagates the notion that all faiths, norms, and principles or values are relative to individuals within their own social contexts. This is to say that what is believed to be morally wrong in one society or culture may not be deemed to be so in another. The need to have cultural relativism in the world has come out of a desire to better understand the cultures which are not our own and to treat them as having equal value. This is a direct effect of globalization as cultures which previously functioned apart from one another have now been forced to come together (Johansson, 205). This means that however much people might feel about other cultures, they have to accept them because not to do so would mean losing the benefits that come with the new world order. Coming to accept other people’s cultures as being equal to the one which one practices can be very difficult and many have for various reasons found it hard to internalize the idea or sense of cultural relativism.

It is often very difficult to embrace cultural relativism if one believes that one’s culture is superior to all other cultures and that the practices of others are not in accordance with one’s view of the world. This creates a bias which is very difficult to get rid of due to the fact that these beliefs are a permanent part of what this individual thinks. Furthermore, it is difficult to internalize cultural relativism when one is not in direct contact with the other cultures which would otherwise have helped in doing this. People tend to spend most of their lives in places where their own cultures are dominant and rarely do they travel to places other than these to experience other cultures. Doing so would be of great help in the process of the internalization of cultural relativism because they would be able to experience other cultures.

Many societal forces affect the cultural boundaries of individuals and these vary from society to society. In some societies, cultural boundaries are affected by the religion practiced by individuals in this society. Religions within certain societies have a tendency of creating boundaries especially when it comes to matters dealing with other religions. Some consider those who practice other religions to be unclean and because of this there is very minimal cultural interaction with them. Moreover, cultural boundaries tend to be created due to prejudices displayed by some people against other cultures because of the differences in the practices between their cultures. For example, in some cultures, women play very prominent roles in the society and are quite vocal while in others, women tend to stay in the background, with no visible roles other than towards their families (Winn, 171 – 172). In this case, people from both of these cultures may view each other with great prejudice because they do not understand why each of them does what they do. They do not understand that the terms ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ have very different meanings in different cultures and what is considered right in one is not necessarily right in the other.

Societal forces which drive cultural boundaries are manifested in the daily communication of individuals. Sometimes, these forces manifest themselves consciously and at other times, they appear unconsciously. We tend to display what our own cultures have taught us about other cultures and this is done even in times when we do not intend to display such characteristics. It is normal for people to believe that their culture is far superior to all others and this is made very obvious when we communicate. An good example of this is when former President George Bush labeled those countries suspected of sponsoring terrorism as The Axis of Evil. This did not go well with these countries the majority of which are Muslim states. President Bush most likely did not intend it to sound like he was declaring war on Islam but this is what it sounded like to most Muslims in the Middle East. We always have to be careful in the way we communicate so that the message being conveyed is not received in a negative light.

Unemployment in the United States

Public programs that provide provisional income maintenance in periods during unemployment can ease the anxieties and concerns about joblessness. However, these programs themselves lead to other worries such as the sufficiency of these benefits, the costs of management, the extent of its coverage and the possibility of dependency on it. In the United States, there is a rising problem of unemployment, which owes its existence to the presence of several factors, which include unemployment benefits. As a result, the United States Government needs to add more restrictions to unemployment benefits to prevent abuse.

The term unemployment benefits is used to refer to the partial, temporary income given to workers who lose their jobs as a result of no fault of their own, and are able and available to work (Florida Department of Revenue). The funds are aimed at improving personal welfare and social security during the given period, and unemployment, in this case, means temporary lack of work (Baicker, Goldin and Katz 228). Unemployment benefits help individuals to level expenditure when affected with loss of jobs, and give those unemployed a chance to get a new, well-matched job. It can be argued that unemployment benefits are providing a vital but often disregarded purpose by reducing the insecurity connected with modern labor markets. Because job insecurity is connected with concerns about potential economic safety, economic support during unemployment may lessen the negative effects of job insecurity on employed individuals' well-being. However, unemployment benefit systems have two main drawbacks: they are often costly to employers, employees, and the state; and while they reduce the hardship of unemployment, they also tend to increase the underlying unemployment problem.

Abuse of unemployment benefits comes in various forms that affect almost every person receiving the benefits. It also affects those that are in employment since it is taxes, which are used by the state and federal governments in order to raise the funds required to pay the said benefits. One of the causes of unemployment in the United States is the high cost of doing business; in a way, those companies and other stakeholders in the job-creation market cannot sustain a large number of employees. In this regard, businesses are not in a position to have all necessary members of staff to cater for their needs and operate various posts in different capacities. This is because all businesses are out to cut the costs of operation and the even higher costs of having a skilled worked force (Poftak ).

In addition, some businesses suffer from slow growth and development leading to economic slumps. In such cases, employees are likely to do without employment, as there are no salaries for them. This is because the businesses in most cases operate at a loss creating uncertainty. Another cause of unemployment is the implementation of technology in a business leading to the elimination of certain job posts. Automation is one such case that cuts back on jobs leading to high rates of unemployment whereby human labor are taken over by machines and automated systems (Beranek, 800).

In addition, job outsourcing can lead to unemployment as a business seeks better solutions from other business. This is rather than having one’s own resources to cater the needs of the business, referring to have another company charge for the same services. In addition, consumer demand plays a crucial role in bringing about unemployment. This is in terms of businesses losing profits at a higher rate than that which they are generated leading to laying off workers due to recession in business. Other factors leading to unemployment are those that involve the employee as an individual. This is concerning the attitude of the employee, perception, discrimination, employee values, ability to look for employment, disability and the willingness to work (Lauringson, 21 - 49). The issue of the ability to look for employment plays a significant role in the issuance of unemployment benefits in a number of ways.

Studies done have revealed that unemployment benefits inhibit the people receiving benefits from looking for jobs (U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee 2). This is because it provides a safety net for employees to fall back on once they lose their jobs. In such cases, unemployment benefits reduce the probability of an unemployed person from working vigorously towards seeking a new job that ensures their day-to-day upkeep. Over the past two decades there has been increasing concern that the unemployment compensation programs established in the large majority of industrialized countries may have unfavorable effects on their labor markets. Unemployment benefits would be considered to decrease the incentives of the unemployed to look for and take jobs, thereby increasing the in which they remain unemployed. It also allows people drop off employment by allowing an enormous form of social security that provides daily upkeep for an unemployed person. This is in addition to this, despite the lack of generosity in unemployment benefits, they do ensure that one lives a decent life that is just above the poverty line (U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee 2). As a result, abuse comes in the form of lazing and staying off the job market. This is in spite of unemployment benefits being much lower than the least paying job can offer. In order to counter this issue, of not looking for a job, the government should create a limit to what a jobless individual can get and for what period. Through this way, it will put the person back on the job market instead of waiting to survive unemployment benefits. In addition, the department of labor should also put in place measures that ensure one does not remain to be unemployed for a long time. Through this, the government can ensure that stiff penalties are applied to those that remain unemployed voluntarily and depend on unemployment benefits for a living. This is by having such individuals take aptitude tests to ensure that they are still competent in the fields they specialize. This is, in addition to the current unemployment status, where unemployed people find it difficult to find jobs without any form of social assistance.

The standard for one to be eligible for unemployment benefits, which require those who receive it to actively look for jobs, take up appropriate job offers or take part in active labor market programs, or risk benefit sanctions, can play a crucial part in counterbalancing the depressing influence of generous unemployment benefits on employment incentives (Venn). Because many unemployed people tend not to work hard enough to look for new jobs once they receive benefits, then it is only right for the government to give preference to those with a history of finding new jobs as quickly as possible. These are more eligible because they do not rely on the taxpayer’s money for too long a time hence they do not abuse the system. Those who have a tendency of not looking for work should be removed from the program after a certain period because they will have been proven to be taking advantage of the system. Furthermore, if it is proven beyond doubt that such people are not looking for work and that they are only taking advantage of the system, then the government should consider taking legal action against them as a way to deter others from doing the same.

The other form through which the issue of abuse can be curbed is through having he said people reimburse the government. This is by having the unemployed find jobs through alternative social programs at a cost to the government (U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee 2). This is in the case where individuals receive aid in finding employment and later paying the government for funds that they lived on in times of unemployment, in the form unemployment benefits. In addition, unemployment benefits coupled with disability benefits creates quite a handsome package on which the unemployed can thrive. In this case, the above measure can cut on this blatant of the kitty.

Concerning the abuse of unemployment benefits, it is common for employees to participate in substance abuse. This is in terms of using substances to the point that they become harmful to one’s health and affect productivity at work. In such cases, an employee may lose his or her job once such a case is figured out, which affects employers and their businesses negatively to the point of making losses and losing clients. It is for this reason that there exists a qualification procedure through which one must go to ascertain their suitability to receive unemployment benefits. For employees who lose their jobs because of drug and substance abuse, lean back and depend solely on unemployment benefits for survival and funding of their vices. Because of such events and occurrences, those that are found to be substance abusers in the work place and lose their jobs consequently, should not be eligible. In such cases, the government should revise the eligibility standards in order to deprive those that intentionally lose their jobs because of substance abuse from using taxpayers’ monies to fund their own vices (Grobe 1). This can be done by having employers submit information on their employees and having a vetting body determine who qualifies and who does not. This is concerning employment protocols and risk of mismanagement of funds. Since this is also open to abuse by employers by providing falsified information to the vetting board, hence, employees should be warned of the consequences of substance abuse and its potential impact on unemployment benefits (Grobe 2). In addition, the government could cut back on the unemployment benefits due to an individual following violation of substance abuse policies (Grobe 2). The funds taken from the individual can then be used to compensate others, particularly in cases where accidents occur because of negligence stemming from substance abuse.

Resetting the benefit duration for unemployed individuals could play a crucial role towards reducing the abuse of unemployment benefits (Poftak 3). This is from the normal period, which is long, and cutting to a more manageable duration. This will work towards cutting back on the duration of dependency and increase the possibility of an individual looking for a job to sustain him or herself. Through this all would benefit, including the government and employers, as the amount of unemployment insurance tax would reduce. This way, all unemployed persons, would be in a position to assess the impact that their reliance on the benefits has on the rest of society. The other way through which abuse of unemployment benefits can be cut by the government is through the application and provision of labor incentives (Standing 7). This can be done by implementing a labor regulation aimed at rewarding labor by giving social protection and punishing slothful workers by denying them the crucial benefits.

The government can also make amendments on the contribution schemes in unemployment benefits. Through such an amendment, employees, while still at work can be made to contribute a larger percentage than that which the employer and the government provide. This is towards the funds that an individual later receives as unemployment benefits (Standing 9). However, if members of the public are made to contribute towards their own benefits, then the possibility of abuse is lowered by a substantial amount, as these are one’s own funds in embezzlement.

The government should not just give benefits to unemployed individuals just because they have no jobs or that they have been laid off, but should also investigate and consider the real cause of unemployment. Some people may choose to leave their jobs just because they have the unemployment benefits to fall back on. Others may lose their jobs because of a case of professional misconduct which their employer finds unacceptable. In such cases, the government should set up measures to ensure that the people involved are not eligible for the reception of unemployment benefits. Furthermore, people with such a history should be permanently not considered for any kind of benefits because they would only end up being a burden on the employed people on whose taxes they depend for their unemployment benefits.

Another step which the government should take to curb the abuse of unemployment benefits is by taking a very active role in finding jobs for those who are unemployed. It should set up requirements which oblige all those people who are unemployed and are beneficiaries of the unemployment benefits program to register with the government. After doing this, the government should then ask all potential employees to inform it if there are any places for those unemployed people who have registered with it. Once such job positions have been secured for these individuals, the government should immediately inform them and stop any more benefits going to them. In this case, the job does not necessarily have to be to the liking of an unemployed person as long as it provides him with an income, and if he is not able to keep that job from some fault of his own, then he government should not be obliged to provide him with any more unemployment benefits. The government should not tolerate the refusal by individuals of any type of job it has found for them, and if any refusal occurs, then the individual involved should be permanently removed from the unemployment benefit program. Through its finding jobs for individuals, the government will also be able to reduce the unemployment rate all over the country meaning that there will also be a great reduction in the dependency on unemployment benefits by individuals to make ends meet.

The government should work towards reducing the amount of benefits that the unemployed people receive instead of increasing it. An increase in benefits to members of the unemployment group will tend to induce them to narrow their list of job targets. The reason for this claim is that, after considering all possible job opportunities in accordance to preferences, and because of the additional unemployment benefits, the unemployed person will give up exploring inferior openings in favor of relatively more attractive ones. The increase in the benefits will also ensure that the unemployed demand higher wages as a condition for employment because thy will feel entitled to it. A reduction of benefits will therefore ensure a decrease in such behavior (Spiezia, 73 – 90).

The unemployment benefit scheme may raise the number of people who voluntarily quit their work and as a result increase the inflow of people into unemployment. These people would comprise those who prefer a spell of unemployment to work on their own personal projects and those who choose to look for new work while unemployed rather than while in employment. It has been found that if there is an extended waiting period before benefit is paid to the unemployed, then the incentive to stop working voluntarily would be correspondingly reduced. Furthermore, in many countries those who leave employment voluntarily are either disqualified from the benefit program or only obtain benefit after an extended waiting period so as to discourage this behavior (Norris, 38 – 45).

The length of time in which the unemployment benefits towards an individual should be greatly reduced to ensure that individuals do not abuse the system. The length of benefit in the United States should be reduced from six months to about half that time so that if one has not found a job by that time, then he or she will be discontinued from the program (Portugal, & Addison, 24 - 30). This will not only serve as an incentive to find a new job quickly but it will also discourage those who would seek to abuse the system from doing so. It is therefore important to put a limit on the length of time in which unemployed people can receive benefits so that the rate of unemployment can be reduced as well as the tendency towards voluntary unemployment.

In addition to the case of lowering the amount of benefits, employment, passed on to an individual, increasing the amount only works in contradiction. This is because, studies prove that the higher the amount of benefits, the higher the rate of unemployment (Smith and Zhang 1). This means that reducing the size and generosity of the unemployment benefits package translates to higher employment rates. Another way to curtail the case of abuse of unemployment benefits is having strict, punitive measure against fraudsters of the fund. This is particularly so in cases where one falsifies or withholds information voluntarily to obtain the benefits (Pennsylvania Bar Association 2). In such an event, the measures should be deterrent and punitive rather than the remorseful penalty requiring one to refund the full amount, a fine and a couple of days in jail. To deter abuse and fraud, harsh measures should be implemented, in a manner punitive enough.

In conclusion, and in relation to all the facts presented herein, the government needs to add more restrictions to unemployment benefits. The key to achieving all of the above would be ensure that the unemployment levels remain low and that benefits are only made available to those who are unemployed through no fault of their own. Stricter measures have to be put in place to ensure that only the most eligible unemployed people are beneficiaries of the system. Those who voluntarily quit their jobs should not even be considered in this scheme because if they continue to be allowed to get these benefits, then it will only encourage more people to quit their jobs in expectation that they will receive unemployment benefits. Unemployment benefits should no longer be considered the right of all the unemployed and should instead be considered to be privilege with should only be available for those who genuinely need it so that those who would abuse this system would not be able to do it. It is therefore necessary for stricter measures to be put in place not only to protect the American taxpayer from the waste of his money but this should also be done in order to curb, deter and punish the abuse of the said benefits.