Aviano EA-6B Gondola Mishap On 3 February, 1998, a Marine EA-6B cut through cables supporting a ski gondola in Calvalese, Italy, killing 20 people. In order to save himself from embarrassment, Captain Schweitzer destroyed the tape that potentially contained information about parts of their mission. Captain Schweitzer should not have destroyed the tape, and when any soldier is faced with the dilemma between truth and lying, they must choose truth even when faced with the potential for reward or punishment. Now that the case is over it is clear to see why destroying the video tape was unethical. At first Captain Schweitzer believed that destroying the video tape would save the United States Marine Corps and himself from humiliation.
War is Necessary When given this complex assignment on war being necessary, our group had conflicting opinions. Some group members believed that wars could be avoided by discussing the situations that brought the groups to that breaking point. They also felt that war is wrong because of the killing of innocent civilians and the destruction of civilizations. Others believed that war was a necessary part of civilizations. They believed that, was often very tragic it can in most instances produce many beneficial outcomes.
In the last chapter of Watchmen we are confronted with a moral and ethical dilemma - Should a crime be punished if the punishment itself might result in an even bigger crime? (I'll be writing more about it in a separate article). But according to poor Rorschach "wrong must be punished, no matter what". And here I come to the part that literally turns the whole outlook of Rorschach's character from a mindless-psychotic-killer-Rorschach to
Capital Punishment and the Deterrence Theory Capital Punishment Deters Crime 11/9/2012 Dr. Ji Seun Sohn Brooke Lee Capital Punishment and the Deterrence Theory: Capital Punishment Deters Crime Jerry Kilgore said in an editorial written for USA Today, “As a former prosecutor, former secretary of public safety and now attorney general, I believe that some crimes are so evil, some criminals so dangerous and some victims so tortured that executing the criminal is appropriate” (Kilgore, 2002). Capital punishment, or commonly referred to as the death penalty, is the most controversial of all of the disciplinary practices. Since it involves taking another human being’s life, this is not at all surprising. Since it is the most severe of all sentences, there have been countless efforts to abolish the death penalty, and in most of the industrialized nations, with the exception of Japan and the United States of America, these efforts have proved effective. In this paper, I will discuss the effect that capital punishment has on deterring criminal activity.
Thus proving, to Tony his life is unworthy of living. Tony wants to change the law to allow his doctor to kill him by lethal injection without getting any kind of charges. The only other course of action Tony could possibly take would be to kill himself, which in his paralysed state he cannot do without assistance. There are many issues surrounding Tony’s circumstances however the biggest issue is the question, should we as humans be able to choose when to die? With two different ethical theories, we can understand the article whilst also comparing the pros and cons of euthanasia.
Persuasive essay Would you not do whatever it takes just to know that there is one less murderer on our planet? Give justice to the vistim’s grieving family at any cost? Many people believe that capital punishmant is unethical and should be abolished. But presently, the crime rate is rapidly increasing due to the lack of effective capital punishment. The murderers deserve to be executed like they killed their victims.
The death penalty is a big issue in today’s society. It has significant effects on the way in which our societies develop and how we view people. We might try to stay away from the people who support the dearth penalty and stick with the anti- death penalty people. I believe that the death penalty should be banned. The death penalty is killing innocent people, violating the constitution, and using a lot of money.
Additional pre-trial time is needed to impose a death sentence as well as the involvement of more experts, more attorneys and additional trials (Dieter). All of these procedures require additional expenditures which make a death trial a costly venture. The second argument that speaks against the efficiency of the death penalty is its obvious immorality and contradiction to all norms of humanity and justice. Execution is actually a judicial murder, and murder definitely goes against proclaimed values of human life, even if it involves the life of a murderer. Stated succinctly, the death
In the essay, “The Death Penalty: Is it Ever Justified,” an admitted killer named, Joseph Carl Shaw, in an appeal wrote: ‘Killing was wrong when I did it. Killing is wrong when you do it. I hope you have the courage and moral strength to stop the killing”’ (575). In the same essay, Edward I. Koch states, “It is a curiosity of modern life that we find ourselves being lectured on morality by cold-blooded killers” (575). If a person takes another persons’ life, how dare they plea for their own!
Consequently, we might even have more time to consume for analyzing what and where may the terrorists’ attacks be. However, if we wasted our time on finding the correct prisoners and torture them, we are not only having a risk of killing them, but a risk of receiving lies, for they might tell lies to stop torturers from continue torturing them, or nothing at all as well. Another case that would be extremely likely to happen is that criminals who are tortured begin to hate the world much severer. As a result, they would become determined that they would say nothing about their plans. Furthermore, they would be viewed as potential risks when they are out from the jail since the more they hate the world, the higher the potential of constructing evil attacks by them would be.