Criminal Justice Ethics Simulation 1. My first chose in decision 1. Would be to challenge my partner about how he conducted the interview. Although, my partner might have strong beliefs that the two offenders committed the crime he was justified in how he went about properly conducting the interview. First, he broke the department policy by not video recording the interview which was essential to built a solid case if they had confess in which he claimed the two did.
What lessons can be learned from Va Tech? (Discuss at least 2) The first and most important lesson would be that we couldn’t judge a person to their full extent. We will never know what they are capable of. Cho, according to “friends” and professors, was just an antisocial person that avoided mostly everyone. If I were in their position the thought of him coming to the campus and killing over 30 people would not have crossed my mind.
NCAA is following Utilitarianism by doing what is best for everyone as a whole, but the realization is that no matter what kind of fine or punishment that they place on the university it is not going to undo what has been done. According to Huff Post, “PSU’s campus community is numb. The students suggested the NCAA sanctions were worse than the death penalty.” The nature of this dilemma will haunt people involved and not for years to come at this university. The NCAA made the most ethical decision that they could regard the severity of the scandal. The NCAA made their decision to prove a point and attempt to make right to the victims and their families involved in this circumstance.
Current law states that us college students won’t loose our financial aid if we do something grotesque like rape or assault someone. Good news if you’re a rapist, but if you’re just the typical college student who gets caught with weed, then your screwed. Federal law states that since a drug offense is a federal offence and you loose all federal support. Ridiculous of course, but what do you expect this is America. I think that the issue has been ran around for far too long, marijuana must be de-criminalized.
The problem in the school structure that Graff recognizes is lack of persuasion to get students to argue. This holds true in my personal experiences in academics. Despite the fact the educating administration is trying to avoid violent disputes because of arguments, they fail to see that properly structured arguments are the best way to avoid violence. Without the school system instilling the ideas and values of argument, students will lack an outlet for an argument consisting of words and are more likely to resort to violence for resolution. In a section of Gerald’s essay he advocates that educated conversation be shared with uneducated audiences as a basis for understanding any scholarly topic as well as a basis for a strong argument.
They could do this by going to a debate between two controversial speakers, listen to both points, then think about what was said and form their own point of view. For example, controversy rose at Yale University in 2006 when a student said, “It would be unusual for the University ever to turn down a speaker wanting to visit campus, because we are interested in what they have to say.” Ultimately, the decision should be left in the hands of the students. Matt Dixon, journalist for the Marquette Tribune, said, “University professors are not allowed to require their students to attend the lectures.” These students are adults and old enough to make their own decisions and listen to what they choose to. In order to answer the question, should controversial speakers be allowed on college campuses, we first need to see if there are any reasons why they shouldn’t be allowed on campuses. If controversial speakers aren’t causing a disturbance and they remain peaceful, they should not have restrictions put on them.
Due to the recent upheaval of violent crimes on campus, many pro-gun activist have suggested that both the students and teachers should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus. Those for this may claim that their rights have been violated because many college campuses refuse to allow weapons of any kind on campus. It is not the right to carry a gun which is in debate here, but rather it is whether or not guns should be allowed on a college campus. The Constitution of The United States of America already grants citizens the right to carry guns, and being in the south, I am by far no stranger to seeing a gun from time-to-time, but it is not appropriate for guns to be in a vulnerable area such as a college campus. There are already too many guns available to the public, and allowing them on an educational facility would greatly increase the likelihood of injury or death.
What will be the future of these young students? They should not be punished for their parent’s actions and the government’s laws. This new law has had a major impact not only on Hispanics citizen in Arizona but on students attending the University of Arizona. Based on the data collected by “the chronicles of higher education”, a partial amount of out of state students has refused to return back to the university due to fear of racial profiling. This is due to not only police man asking people for proof of legal residence, but college officials as well.
Sam Duyck Mr. McWaters English 101 11:00 September 18, 2011 Much of the article, “Getting Serious about Eradicating Binge Drinking,” by author Henry Wechsler has a biased view on drinking and the way people drink in college. This piece of work gives many problems and solutions to binge drinking on a college campus. College is not full of binge drinkers or people who wreak havoc across campus. Binge drinking is a bad thing when over used or not controlled. Colleges and people all over the country are doing things to slow down binge drinking but it will never be eradicated in teens and young adults.
“The assumption that college campuses are safer because students are not allowed to carry concealed weapons is flawed;” argues the SCCC (Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, 2008) "Current school policies and state laws against concealed carry on campus serve only to stack the odds in favor of dangerous criminals." (Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, 2008) By allowing concealed weapons on campuses, not only would criminals be deterred from attempting to commit a gun-related crime, but students would feel safer knowing they have the means to defend themselves in a worst-case