According to Hinman (5), just punishment is the one that happens to those who are proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. This is important because capital punishment is irreversible and hence only the guilty should be executed. However, there are many cases of innocent people who have been sentenced to death only to have their appeals granted at the last minute, or worse, denied and executed. It is on these grounds that Bedau (2007) argues against the death penalty because it is unjust and unfair. About unfairness, he goes on to add that racial and economic discrimination are also a factor to consider when meting out capital punishment.
The biggest issue of banning guns is not only this trivial aspect which I just mentioned, is the entire smuggling network there would be evolving guns. The police also state that robbers would create a huge black market selling people, drugs, and many other objects to eventually buy guns. After all this chaos is established, the government wouldn’t be able to do anything to avoid guns, as they will be all illegal, crime rate percentages would leap, and America's developed nation would slowly lose its
"Moral desert" is just a philosophical notion that a person deserves something based on his or her actions, and it is not cleared up by equality retributivism because equality retributivism calls for us to "behave barbarically to those who are guilty of barbaric crimes" (Nathanson). Another example of this is imagine a rapist. It would be barbaric and morally unacceptable to rape the rapist. Even though it may seem that those who kill should be killed themselves, it really isn't moral and is not universally
In an FBI Report, it is said that psychopaths are not a favorable criminal for the law enforcement because they are able to manipulate the interrogations and authorities. During an interrogation, a psychopath will breakdown and lie, saying that it was the victim’s fault. A jury is most likely to be manipulated to give a psychopath a shorter sentence because “psychopaths are very adept at imitating emotions such as remorse or guilt in the courtroom if they believe it will mitigate their punishment” (Bonn, 2016). On average, psychopaths have a 2.5 times chance of getting released than those offenders that are not considered psychopaths. Unlike males, females with psychopathy take up one percent of the
According to Julia Kristeva “any crime, because it draws attention to the fragility of the law, is abject, but premeditated crime, cunning murder are even more so because they heighten the display of such fragility” (2002: 232). This essay argues, that Dexter is an abject, as he attracts and disgusts, and transgresses both moral and physical borders. These elements of abjection are established by means of the narrative, as well as by technical codes and mise-en-scène codes. The first indicator that shows an implication of the abject notion in this scene (Dexter.
Littering, speeding, pollution and every other ‘small’ law is at most a gateway to laws considered ‘bigger’ in aspects of the crime and its punishment when broken. Those who are not scofflaws and actually take in consideration to our society, can detect a true scofflaw and react towards their actions in a violent manner. When pollution, be it noise or waste, is committed around a ‘good’ citizen, he or she usually reacts in a violent tone to show that they do not condone the breaking of the small law. And the one who committed the crime, which in this case is pollution, would react back at an equal tone, causing something worse than pollution. The breaking of these ‘small’ laws is not to be taken lightly by justice and should have its consequences.
Usually the low risk offenders that tend to get a technical violation would get lenience by the judge (Steven-Martins et al, 2014). Offenders that resulted in completing probation were mostly employed (Steven-Martins et al, 2014). The only factors that made a difference in determining who was most likely to get a technical violation were in age, gender, employment and income (Stevens-Martin et al, 2014). Each of these factors shows how a person is likely to violate probation because they were exposed to a different circumstance. This article gave a good result of where a probation officer might be able to determine which client will most likely violate supervision.
Trippett’s theory on the bust of our societal foundation and structure is the most perceptible aspect of information in his stance on the deteriorating strength of constructional law that is expressed in his passage. Trippett carefully exposes the source of this phenonem, it’s actually those who blame the failing reigns of law-and-order by the violence of others, and yet choose to break the law then most convenient to them.
“Hate crime” laws are defined as a crime based around a prejudice. There are two different types of hate crimes. One type of law gives a specific group protection that other people do not have. The penalty enhancement law is the other, and this law “requires that a defendant receive a stiffer sentence if it can be proved that the victim was chosen due to prejudice” (citation).
Creon said in line 121 that he should be punished indeed, and that he is deserving of what he gets. The story has shown him be the opposite of this before, and not willing to accept what has happened. For example, when he did not let go to Polyneices and made the messenger search for who it was that has done such a “horrible thing” and “gone against his word” while what Antigone has done, was truly the right thing to do. This has shown has Creon has gone from being not very admirable to being very admirable in the end of the story. Creon is a tragic hero in the Antigone because of many reasons.
The U.S. justice system is considered the fairest of all but if confessions are inadmissible and true criminals are released then our society will progress under great peril from continued violent acts. Law enforcement officers are mandated by Miranda to advise subjects in a custodial interrogation of their rights under the Fifth Amendment and their right to a counsel under the Sixth Amendment. The policies of police departments everywhere had to be changed due to Miranda; as this decision provided a fundamental shift in the tactics being used by investigators to interrogate suspects. No longer could officers pray on the ignorance of the law or intimidation of authority in order to compel confessions. “The courts have made it very clear that the use of physical force or physical abuse or even the threat of this type of conduct on the part of police will render a confession involuntary”
Jeff Jacoby provides a strong argument in “Bring Back Flogging”, suggesting that we should adopt a few of the punishments of the Puritans. This argument is built on logical appeal, emotional appeal, and his own personal credibility as a writer. Providing statistics and information, Jacoby creates the logos, or logical appeal, and ethos, or personal credibility. In Addition, he uses ethos, or emotional appeal to force the reader to think about what they believe is morally worse. In “Bring Back Flogging”, Jacoby says Puritan forefathers punished crimes with flogging, including whipping and branding; however, in current times we tend to put a person in jail, no matter the crime.
I believe that when attempting to convict a person of a crime, there should be plenty of physical evidence of that person doing the crime in order of there to even be a case. In many cases, repressed memories can be false, but the author of Repressed Memories: True and False, believes that in some cases repressed memories can be legit but neither should be used as a reliable source in a criminal case. Only reliable sources should be used when attempting to convict another on a crime they may or may not have done. Loftus experiments prove that cases that involve repressed memories as a primary source are typically weak cases (Reisner Paragraph 13). In reality, and type of evidence used in a criminal case should be physical.
This blog, is based on Evan Defilippis overview on the pros and cons of gun control. Defilippis develops well written and clear visual arguments on both sides of the issue. For example, he states “The main point of this argument is that criminals do not follow laws; therefore laws restricting gun ownership and types of guns would only hurt those who follow them.” “Gun control laws only help criminals, criminals do not play by the law. That is why we need to punish criminals, not law-abiding citizens by disarming them.
These conclusions are not supported by the available data. Justice Stevens has also argued that the risk of error in capital cases may be greater than in other cases because the facts are often so disturbing that the interest in making sure the crime does not go unpunished may overcome residual doubt concerning the identity of the offender. The same could be said of any criminal penalty, including life without parole; there is no proof that in this regard the death penalty is distinctive. He also states: I have relied on my own experience in reaching the conclusion that the imposition of the death penalty" is