Consumer Product Safety Act Discussion

Consumer Product Safety Act Discussion

Instructions/Descriptions

Consumer Product Safety Act Discussion

There are multiple sections on the Money and Credit pages related to: Shopping and Saving; Buying/Owning a Car; Credit and Loans; Dealing with Debt; and Resolving Consumer Problems. Making connections to the assigned chapters in the textbook and the law should not be difficult.

Based on chapters 21-23 and 39 and the Money and Credit pages of the FTC website connect two different sections of the Money and Credit pages to the textbook and explain the law related to those provisions. You are required to provide at least two citations to the FTC/money-credit pages and two citations to the textbook (at least four citations total), but the highest grades will provide more.

There are multiple sections on the Money and Credit pages related to: Shopping and Saving; Buying/Owning a Car; Credit and Loans; Dealing with Debt; and Resolving Consumer Problems. Making connections to the assigned chapters in the textbook and the law should not be difficult.

After reading the Assigned Material, prepare your writing assignment (post) in a Word document. You may use the spell-check and grammar check features. However, DO NOT QUOTE OR CUT AND PASTE FROM ANY SOURCE INCLUDING THE ASSIGNED MATERIAL. INTERNET RESOURCES OR OTHER RESOURCES OUTSIDE THE ASSIGNED MATERIAL ARE PROHIBITED, AS IS COLLABORATION. Show your own understanding in your own words. Access your discussion board by clicking on the link above and creating a new thread. Once you create a new thread cut and paste your writing assignment from your Word document into your thread by NOON on SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 6. After copying your Writing Assignment to the thread, you MUST then upload your Writing Assignment (post) to SafeAssign within 5 minutes to avoid a 0 score. The SafeAssign link can be found below the Writing Assignment/Class Discussion in Blackboard. Unfortunately, Blackboard does not allow for SafeAssign submission in the discussion board. If you do not upload your Writing Assignment (post) to SafeAssign, you will earn a 0 score on that assignment.

Your initial post is worth 35 points and your replies (two are required) are worth 15 points, 50 points total for the writing assignment. Please read the additional instructions in the syllabus. You will not be able to see other posts until you post. Please treat this assignment as a serious writing assignment. The rubric is strictly followed and no one gets credit just for posting, therefore prepare your post ahead of time and copy into your thread. Once you post, you will be able to see other posts and you can then reply. However, if you post in error before your post is complete or your post is blank, the first post will be graded even if blank.

Your post/replies can only be based on the FTC/Money and Credit pages (link provided above), textbook, lectures, and slides and other responses. Internet resources and other resources outside the course material are prohibited, as is collaboration. Your post should be 300-400 words and each reply should be approximately 100 words.

[Order Now]

Showing substantive knowledge of the Assigned Material requires addressing the prompt, providing at least two citations to the FTC/money-credit pages (do not quote from the website), and at least two citations to the textbook, which support your analysis (at least four citations total). Your analysis must be in your own words and you must show your own understanding in your own words. When citing to the FTC/money-credit website, to help students (and me) find the section easily, describe the section by name with specificity because the URL is not clickable within the Class Discussion board (i.e., Shopping and Saving/Shopping Green/Bamboo Fabrics) and provide the URL in parenthesis at the end of the sentence (i.e., https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/bamboo-fabrics); and when citing to the textbook provide chapter and the section or page of the textbook/e-book (i.e., Chapter 4, s

The Politically Incorrect Sign and Private Property

I’m working on a business law discussion question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.

You’re on the Jury: The Case of the Politically Incorrect Sign

Disturbed by the number and variety of signs that individuals were putting up within its borders, a city passed an ordinance prohibiting all signs on private property except in commercial areas for advertising.  Eri, a homeowner, pasted a sign on the front door of his house containing an American flag with these words underneath the flag: “Down with the Mayor and the City Council – Our rights are being violated”.  He then went door to door in his neighborhood passing out copies of this sign and asking his neighbors to display it as well. Eri was arrested for violating the ordinance.

The Trial

During the trial, a witness for the city described how many signs had appeared in the past on homes and on lawns for commercial home businesses, ruining the appearance of the community.  He explained that many other cities and towns had experienced the same problems and that the ordinance was reasonable and the only way to solve the problem. The restriction, he said, was content neutral as it was addressing a societal problem.  Eri testified that the sign he had put up was a small one and that other City residents had raised flags on national holidays and put-up signs showing their patriotism.  None of these residents had been arrested.

[Order Now]

The Arguments at Trial

The City’s attorney argued that a city had the authority to regulate signs within its borders to protect the appearance and value of properties.  She further argued that the ordinance did not unduly restrict free speech as there were other ways for residents to express their views: radio, television, and the newspapers.  Eri’s attorney argued that the regulation violated the freedom of speech provisions of the federal constitution, was too broad, too vague, and was unreasonable.  He argued that the city could have limited the ordinance by restricting signs over a certain size and in certain locations.  He further argued that it was unreasonable to restrict the expression of opinions except for the use of the media.

Discussion Questions to be Answered

Who has the stronger arguments, the City or Eri? Why?

What are the laws here that are being applied and is their application proper?

If you were the on the jury hearing this case, for whom would you decide? Why?

Consumer Product Safety Act Discussion

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!