Analysis Republicans don’t agree with the assault weapon bans. They are suggesting other ways to prevent mass shooting. They believe assault weapons ban is going to encourage more crimes. Instead of banning assault weapons republics are suggesting to find out who has the access to those guns, especially people who are mentally ill. This is a serious concern because it would be impossible to track each and every person who is mentally
I think that this law is not good because no one should be killed just because the person stolen something. In my own opinion why this law should not be used today is because if someone steals property then that person should be put in jail and not killed and not the person that recieves the stolen property. Another opinion why this law should not be used today is because the person that recieves the stolen property did not know that the property was stolen because the person that stole it did not tell them. Another opinion why this law should not be used today is because no one should be killed just because they stole some property. Another opinion why this law should not be used today is because of crimal justice.
John Parker Professor Duncan Criminology 3 December 2012 Va Tech Massacre 1. Is there any value in trying to discover why this event happened? Personally finding out why Cho committed this tragedy would not change the way of things in the slightest. For example, if the reason for Cho committing the massacre was that he was bullied it wouldn’t have a value. The most that our society can do it say don’t bully other people, which I have personally experienced does not mean that people will not bully others.
The Death Penalty Reviewed Matthew Christiani 5-22-12 Phil-05 In the debate over capital punishment, the opponents argue that the death penalty should be legalized because; it is by implementation, that we have been able to decrease the murder rate in society by placing such a high penalty on murder. On the other side of the debate, the supporters argue that capital punishment should not be legalized because it promotes the injustice in which it is intended to prevent. In this paper, I will argue that the stronger of the two arguments is to do away with the death penalty. In the article titled “The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense”, Ernest Van Den Haag concludes that the death penalty is moral and should be legalized because it deters
It is produced from a feeling of indignation and intolerance for the conduct that takes place in prostitution. That feeling brings the opponents to believe that the society finds itself in a vulnerable position. In this vulnerable state, the community becomes threatened by immorality, but how can they determine whether or not sex for money is immoral? Perhaps, one would consider a profession in taking people’s homes that have been affected by the Recession more criminal than prostitution, but that occupation by no means criminalized. This brings one to the conclusion that it is impossible to assume there is one shared morality because different opinions exist.
Kendo Lyn Cline 10-07-14 Dre-098 Stand your ground law promotes vigilantism and provides loopholes for murderers. The stand your ground law states that,” A person may use deadly force in self-defense without the duty to retreat when faced with a reasonable perceived threat.” Stand your ground laws should be outlawed nationwide because of inability of understanding regards of the law, inability of writing effective laws, and inability of common individuals to make life and death decisions. Stand your ground laws should be outlawed because of the inability of understanding regards of the law. People seem to not understand what the word threatens really means. A simple fist fight can lead to a person being shot over absolutely nothing.
Critical Analysis on “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate.” Dan Gardner’s publish, “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate”, is strongly controversial in his position against increasing enforcement of drug laws, and boosting penalties for violators. He believes that you should actually limit enforcement and hardship of sentencing when it comes to drugs. Was his argument persuasive enough in the essay to actually influence his wishes into society? Personally, I don’t think so. Gardner’s ideas are too drastic and I believe he didn’t have enough support in his argument that his plans would actually decrease the murders in gang violence.
Is the death penalty unjust? Blackmun is opposing towards the death penalty. He claims that there is many faults in the system. Therfore thay should not be allowed to decide whether one should be kiiled on their commited crimes. In contrast to Scalia I think he has good points but he needs a better argument than the judical system has faults.
Thinking about it more, I realized that hate-crimes legislation doesn't aim to punish the actual crime, but rather the motive (or thoughts) behind it. That's smacks of being more than a little Orwellian to me, besides being something that's very difficult to prove. If someone is continually spouting hateful speech, there's a pretty good chance you can figure out that their motive for a crime might be related to that hate. But what about someone who doesn't give any
It is clear that people do not abide by the laws regarding to alcohol consumption and that shows their lack of respect for this law so what’s stopping people from loosing respect for other laws and in consequence not following them? When laws are put in place but they are difficult or near impossible to enforce it causes a loss of respect by the members of society. Albert Einstein is correct in saying that “nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced”. In conclusion there is no point in making a law which cannot be