“At the moment, there is a myth in circulation, a fable that goes something like this: Radical terrorists will take advantage of our fussy legality, so we may have to suspend it to beat them. Radical terrorists mock our namby-pamby prisons, so we must make them tougher. Radical terrorists are nasty, so to defeat them we have to be nastier.” (Applebaum). This is the story being used for validating of torture. There is no proof that this story has any truth.
In the Abu Ghraib prison scandal of 2004, Iraqi prisoners were interrogated where accounts of psychololgical, physical and sexual abuse, including torture, rape and homicide. This “form” of interrogation was practiced my U.S. military police at the prison. Although the solders are responsible for there actions they where under strict orders that went against the Geneva convention conduct of war. When the scandal surfaced the U.S. government denied all knowledge and participation and blamed the solders. After comparing the Abu Ghraib schandle and the Milgram experiment its easy to see that the government had a big roll in influencing soilders.
December 8, 2011 A Comparative Critique of “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror” and “The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal: Sources of Sadism” The subject of obedience to authority to the point where a human would cause physical harm to another human has been greatly debated among modern critics. In his article “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror”, Crispin Sartwell suggests that the average ordinary citizen will participate in mass genocide. In contrast, “The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal: Sources of Sadism” by Marianne Szegedy-Maszak focuses on the response of soldiers in the military to their superiors. Both articles cover ground dealing with man’s response to social consensus and obedience. In contrast, however, Sartwell’s article focuses primarily upon the civilian aspect of obedience, whereas Szegedy-Maszak focuses more upon the military aspect.
Too many people have hurt by this, not only Andrews and Myurans family and friend but our whole world. Firstly Andrew and Myuran had made a drug rehabilitation centre in the prison that has turned a lot of people around and towards a new life. Andrew became a minister who focused on counselling and he became a mentored for his fellow inmates. Myuran became an artist who focused to establish a drug counselling program and he was teaching his fellow inmate’s jobs skills like computer work and graphic designing, for when they get out of prison. Would you kill a man after he has been change?
Once again, through increased persecution and torture, confessions surfaced[11], 13 out of the 17 defendants were shot, and the rest were put into labor camps and eventually died from the severe conditions. Similar to the case of Sixteen, these forced confessions incriminated another group of people, the so-called right wing opposition, only adding fuel to the
These experiments offer a powerful and disturbing look into the power of authority and obedience. Milgram’s experiment explains how far people will go in pleasing their authority figure even if it means ignoring their own beliefs and morals. Because the two Marines are brought into situation where obedience is expected, even when it goes against personal morals, Dawson and Downey were ordered to perform an illegal act called “Code Red,” which requires them to assault a fellow Marine. In A Few Good Men, two Marines, LCpl Dawson and PFC Downey, are order to do a “Code Red” by Lt Kendrick. Kendrick was previously been ordered by Col Jessup.
In some states, the individual must be convicted of two serious felonies for the three strikes law to apply, while in others any felonies count towards the third strike. Critics of the three strike law express many strong arguments against their harsh legal statute. Our society has ultimately had an issue with the three strikes law. Some people have said that the law “destroys the flexibility of the courts and the judge, it is unjust in certain conditions, and it adds more criminals to an already crowded and expensive criminal system”
Zimbardo-Stanford Prison Experiment The Stanford Prison Experiment was made because Zimbardo was interested in finding out whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities of the guards or had more to do with the prison environment. Since Zimbardo wanted the experiment to feel real, he had the students, who were assigned as prisoners, to be arrested at their own homes, without any warnings. They were first taken to a real jail where they were fingerprinted, photographed and “booked” before being blindfolded and taken to the “prison” where the experiment would take place. Each prisoner had their personal possessions removed and locked away; they were given prison clothes and were referred to by their number on their uniform. The Stanford Prison Experiment was a mock prison experiment where they had chosen 24 Male Students selected from the 75 who volunteered to join the experiment.
The original issue was the protection of national security, which was compromised during the 9-11 attacks. To counteract those attacks, the Bush administration declared war on terrorism and built Guantanamo Bay Prison in Cuba. This prison was designed to hold the worst of the worst. Along with AUMF, Congress passed another act called the Military Commissions Act, in 2006, stripping all military courts of the right to hear Habeas Corpus, which was later repealed under the Obama administration in
Prisons have been utilized as a means to punish individuals for crimes committed since 1790 in the United States. The philosophy behind how punishment should be administered to inmates has flip-flopped back and forth from the harsher forms of retribution to the milder forms of rehabilitation. Prisons have experienced a booming population, worker exploitation, and medical reform for the inmates. Prisons serve a well needed part of the criminal justice system, yet they are the least thought of part of the criminal justice system. References Banks, C. 2005.