Columbine Shooting On April 20, 1999, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris attacked Columbine High school in Colorado. They arrived at school with an arsenal of knives, guns, and bombs, as well as two propane bombs that they had already placed in the cafeteria rigged with timers. According to Jennifer Rosenberg, “When the day was done, twelve students, one teacher, and the two murderers were dead; plus 21 more were injured (Columbine Massacre).” They had planned on two propane bombs going off in the cafeteria killings hundreds more students, but this was not the case. The bombs were rigged up incorrectly, and did not explode at 11:17 as planned. At 11:20 they decided something had gone wrong.
On top of pleading not guilty, he refused the advice of the attorney presented to him to plead insanity and blame it on black rage. The attorney tried to convince Ferguson that he would be likely to win if he plead not guilty on the basis of insanity and black rage which came from the suppression of African Americans in a white society. He refused to plead insanity and repeatedly told the court that he was sane- although he refused psychiatric analysis as well. He fired his attorney, shortly after he was granted him, and refused his right to be represented in the court of law, his right as an American citizen protected under the fourteenth amendment. This is what made this court case so interesting.
This man caused a family to be broken, a man to be scarred forever, and disturbed the minds of thousands of people across the nation. I guess it goes without saying that he deserved far more than life in prison with a chance of parole. This criminal deserved the DEATH penalty. You should definitely consider this a case of injustice. Lastly, the Charles Manmosn case was a situation of injustice because it make other criminals think that they can get away with doing wrong things without getting proper punishment.
Appius did not care about the truth of a case that passed through his courthouse. Not only did he allow a completely untrue case to be tried by the false churl, he asked for it to occur. The doctor shows that he does not approve of this occurrence by the fate of that judge, who is thrown in jail and later kills himself. This being said, finding justice would be the most important factor in his role as a judge. Many folks do not realize how difficult life can be out in the world.
Some of the smartest individuals and the leaders of most countries decided torture was inhumane and should be outlawed. Thus torture was one of the first issues that the United Nations dealt with (Dieringer). The act of torture is so inhumane and such a pressing issue that the leaders of the world outlawed it as quickly as possible to save lives. Torture is so powerful and so evil that it may deprive someone of his will to exist. Depriving a person of his will to live is the same, if not worse than killing that person.
Prisons are consistently overflowing with repeat offenders and minor criminals. In addition to repeat offenders and perpetrators of minor crimes clogging up the system, the cost of keeping a prisoner is astronomical compared to the author’s suggested form of punishment. However, I do see the need for prisons, or someplace comparable, to keep the most violent criminals out of society. I believe Moskos should have stated hard facts regarding the ineffectiveness of prisons and given pertinent details about the productive use of corporal punishment. I’m not sure there are any “appropriate” forms of punishment.
Capital Punishment The most severe sentence used in our nation is capital punishment, or execution. More than 14,500 confirmed executions have been carried out in America under civil authority. Most Americans will admit that they approve of capital punishment. An “eye for an eye,” if a person can commit a heinous act of murder, or rape he, or she should be punished for that crime by giving his, or her life. The death penalty is considered a deterrent to criminal activity but does it make the execution morally correct or just brutal?
This results in poor representation of convicted people in courts and unfair verdicts. Another issue associated with the penalty is that the value of life is lessened. Government should be concerned with the damage inflicted on society when a person is sentenced to be killed by juries. Being put to death by a people does not seem to be that different from a heinous murder committed by a murderer. With all of the media reporting executions like movies, societies become desensitized and accept death penalty as the right way to take care of criminals.
Capital punishment is defined as the execution of a person by the state as punishment for a crime. It is said that capital punishment is inhumane as it involves the killing of people. It concerns a life created by God and raises the question on the value of life and human rights. That is why several countries have started to abolish the aforementioned rule and have used the life sentence for the same cases as that of capital punishment. Countries that still wish to use the death penalty use it for very severe crimes/offences and are likely to be less economically developed countries such that of Ethiopia, Nigeria and Malaysia.Compared to the previous times, the death penalty is now reserved as a punishment for severe crimes such as murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice.
They believe this was a right that they were given by our Four Fathers, which is clearly not true. Yes, they have the freedom of speech but when should the freedom be taken away? What about the rights of the innocent victims and their families? Hate crimes, because of their nature will always lead to violence and this is not a freedom that people should have. In my opinion, the penalties for hate crimes should continue to be more severe than that of a regular crime because so many innocent people are injured and even killed simply because they are different.