A Defense of the Death Penalty Louis P. Pojman The death penalty serves as both a deterrent for would be murderers and a fitting punishment for those who intentionally and out of malice take the life of another human being. Retribution: It is sometimes argued that the death penalty serves as a form of revenge for the victims of heinous crimes. For those who argue from this stance, revenge is never the proper method for assigning punishment because it is done out of anger and with the intent of inflicting harm upon another human being. Vengeance itself is not the basis for designating the death penalty. Instead retribution is justification enough, although it may be accompanied by feelings of anger and hatred.
The people that Shelton killed are considered combatants because they support they governmental system and work with it. Based on Just War Theory, the proportionality of killing these people is that their deaths are outweighed by the justice that will bring to the judicial system. Shelton believes the system to be corrupt, focusing instead on conviction rates rather than making sure the right person is placed behind bars. By killing these people Shelton can put a new mindset into the “system” because those affected by the killings will want the right man punished rather since they now know how it feels to be wronged. All the killings made by Shelton were to people who were directly showed how flawed the system was.
Prison time is an effective deterrent to a point, with some people more time is needed. Prosecutors should have the option of using a variety of punishments in order to minimize crime. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, it would seem that justice would be better served if they too were killed as they had planned to kill another human being. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims and this should be altered.
He went too far. He also doesn’t know that his revenge will also hurt him. He won’t go to heaven because he killed someone. This story is also saying something that is true. Revenge is sweeter when the person least expects it.
If Barbie does not die Ken can still be hit with a charge for disclosing the fact that he had aids. Ken would probably get hit with intentional transmission which is when you fail to inform your partner that you don't have aids. Theres is also a possibility that Ken wont get charged because the laws are still very blurry when it comes to the transmission of aids. What is Homicide? Homicide is murder but not all homicides are illegal some are considered justified homicide an example of justified homicide is when its done as an act of self defense.
Relativism Relativism The article of “Some Moral Minima” written by Lenn Goodman, discusses issues in our society he believes to be truly unethical and wrong. Some cultures believe the things mentioned by Goodman to be ethical and acceptable in their culture because it is they way they way have been doing things for many years. Some points discussed by Goodman are genocide, terrorism, and rape. The first example from Goodman is genocide, the murdering or extermination of an entire race or culture. Mass murder is compared to genocide and an example would be when nations or groups are at war with each other.
Asked if she knew what it meant to kill someone, Weier purportedly responded, “I believe it’s ending a life and I regret it.” She also reportedly told the police, “The bad part of me wanted her to die, the good part of me wanted her to live.” Geyser reportedly stated that what she did was probably wrong. Both girls believed so much in the fictional character they thought that killing their classmate would show their devotion. Many people in court asked for mental tests to be done on both girls, since they haven’t done anything wrong before, the presence of a mental issue is possible. Geyser's attorney fought for the case to be fought in juvenile court. Though their brains are still developing they are still held liable for their actions.
Their condition might take an unexpected turn; or they might change their mind about a treatment; or a treatment might have disappointing effects. In these and similar cases, withdrawal of a treatment after trying it will be acceptable legally and ethically. If the team believes that a treatment could do some good, it would be unacceptable not to commence it on the basis of a false fear that it would not be possible to stop the treatment. Special legal procedures are associated with decisions relating to patients in a persistent vegetative state (BMA 2007). Intention Charges of murder and voluntary manslaughter require an intention to kill or harm on the part of the accused.
He explains that the death penalty is just an act of torture and is too horrible to be used by our civilized society, stating that it is “torture until death” (220). He goes on to argue that the death penalty is unjust in its practice because it is applied in arbitrary and also in discriminatory ways. Quoting, “Remain grants that the death penalty is a just punishment for some murderers, but he thinks that justice does not require the death penalty for murderers” (221). He goes on to say that life imprisonment can be an alternative decision that stratifies the requirements of the justice
Most humans have fear in speaking against something that is unjust and a violation of our dignity because it gives power to the higher authority to control. Sex trafficking has been a violation of our dignity as well because society fails to give it such importance and education. While viewing the colloquium on sex trafficking, Dr. Brian showed a short 5-minute video by Nicholas Kristoff who was a journalist by the NY Times that aired a documentary particularly about a 14-year-old girl who was forced into prosecution in Asia and then was left to be physical abused to an extent that she lost an eye. I could imagine how cruel our society can be. What hope and dignity did this girl have left at such a young age?