Charles Manson is a serial killer that was put in prison. He killed 35 people that did nothing to him. Do you think he should be executed? Amendment 8 of the Constitution states that he can not be executed, therefore he will continue to live in a prison where he gets 3 hot meals a day, a comfortable cot to sleep on, free time outside, and possibly television. I think amendment 8 should be changed from no cruel and unusual punishment to, a person shall be punished how the court see´s fit. Here is my case.
If a murderer or a rapist is caught for their crime then they go to prison for a long time, you think that is bad. But really they are getting everything that a middle class American gets (they work, prisoners do not). If a murderer or a rapist is caught for their crime I think that they should have a punishment that fits the crime. You murder
…show more content…
You go to prison for five years. That is fair because you stole someone 's money. You violated amendment 5. Case closed, that is a fair case, yes it has excessive bail, but the case is over, the guy is taken care of.
Lastly, If someone commits a crime such as a small robbery, they get 6 months of jail, that is not enough to get it in their heads that they shouldn 't do this again. If you change the 8th amendment then they can be charged with 2 years for a small robbery. That will get it in their heads that they should not do this again. That is the last reason I have for my case.
In conclusion, The 8th amendment is something that needs changed. It should say that ¨if someone commits a crime, an equal punishment shall be given in return.¨ I have three reasons to support my claim, one of which is the fact that criminals have to easy of a punishment. Another is that my version of the amendment is fair. My last one is that if someone is doing a small crime they get an even smaller punishment, so you need to up the punishment. That is my
Argument found in 13th: The abuse of the 13th amendment is an extension to slavery, which was supposedly abolished when the it was introduced, because of the exception clause found in the amendment. AGREE: The 13th amendment has an exception clause that states slavery and involuntary services are illegal except as a punishment for crime. After the Civil had ended and slaves were let free, many police officers were arresting African American people. The south was able to use the African American prisoners as slaves.
When change is necessary then one needs to fight for it. Willingly breaking a law may seem absurd but when you are fighting for something you believe in then the reward of justice should outweigh the risk of
But they fail to realize that the system we have now throws anyone in jail no matter if the person committed the crime or not. They also fail to realize that the current system sentencing isn't organized or fair because there are people out there innocent and people who don’t deserve that time that was given for petty crimes. The current system doesn’t seek for justice, they see everyone who gets arrested as a criminal and feels they should be thrown away for a very long time and that isn't fair. Sentencing reforming is highly recommended due to the outrageous modern sentencing practices we have today. People go to jail or maybe even prison for such petty crimes that doesn't deserve the many years that were given to them.
Notoriety in the Charles Manson Trials In many cases and trials of the world, notoriety, or being famous from a bad quality or deed, affects many outcomes and verdicts. As more media and newsmen become familiar with famous cases, their articles are what capture the public’s attention, and what the public’s opinions of the trial are based on. This popularity of a trial can even help determine the future of the person that is accused of the crime.
Instead of amending the 14th Amendment, birthright citizenship should be redefine. One main reasoning politicians have for amending the 14th Amendment
The Constitution of the United States is the concrete platform that the nation is built upon which contains fundamental principles in which our nation is governed by. However, much of the Constitution is very ambiguous which leads to controversy in the court room. For example, the Eighth Amendment which states that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (Baltzell). The first part of the Eighth Amendment protects accused citizens of the United States from unreasonable and extreme amounts of bail that would prevent them from being released from pretrial containment and it also limits the amount of a fine that can be given to a convicted person (8th Amendment)(Kurt). The
Roper V Simmons involved a juvenile (Christopher Simmons) who committed murder and got the death penalty. Christopher Simmons had the desire to commit murder and thought since he was a minor he would get away with the crime. On September 8th , Christopher Simmons, Charles Benjamin, and John Tessmer met at 2 am and planned to rob and murder a victim, their victim ended up being Shirley Cook. The three found Mrs. Cook in her bedroom, they then proceeded to tie her up and cover her mouth with duct tape , after they drove her to the Meramec River and dropped her off the bridge leaving her to drown. Tessmer fled the scene and ended up testifying against Simmons.
The violation of this amendment should be a criminal offense. It is likely that this would have a positive impact on the world. Jail time is a punishment in which mortality is not threatened, however it is still severe enough to enact attention. Even though it is
California overcrowding prisons conditions has gain National attention. The U.S. Supreme court has found that California is in violation of the 8th Amendment. California has been required to reduce their prison inmates by 40,000 inmates. California has utilized many options to reduce the inmate population within the prison system. California has to two years to reduce the inmates count in the prison system.
The judgment of those who have committed serious crimes is not only arguable but untrustworthy. The right to vote should not return to felons upon completing their sentence because, there is no way of knowing if the individual has since improved their character. Ex cons should have to go a certain amount time without committing any sort of crime before voting rights are restored. While some may feel not permitting felons to vote goes against the eighth amendment, not allowing them to vote is in the people’s best
6th Amendment I personally find that out of all the amendments the most important one is the 6th amendment. Reason being that it is crucial in aiding the judicial process from wrongly persecuting innocent people and it allows our democratic process to continue without preventing innocent people for taking the fall while punishing those who harm it. It keeps justice in check, keeping laws in line and rulings to be fair. The 6th amendment helps the defendants have an attorney when they are unable to afford one.
Killing another seems very unjustifiable, which might be the case but when someone takes another 's life and sent to prison, death row or capital punishment is needed to put that person were they belong. People like that deserve to die because of their mistake of killing another and it deters other people to not kill others, showing them what would happen. In the case of Capital Punishment, Hunting for Sport, or George and Lennie, killing is a justifiable act. In the case of capital punishment killing is justified and needs to be done. For example, “Some crimes are so inherently evil they demand strict penalties up to and including death”(McClatchy).
However, even after accounting for risk aversion and “innocence” I think this final amendment ruins the survival lottery. In theory it is morally permissible, but a life with no risk is boring and against our human instincts. In fact, many would describe that life as one not worth living at all. The idea of a survival lottery is not morally permissible, would be impossible to enforce without discriminating against people based on age, sex, income, etc., and, should never be considered unless life on Earth is being threatened (and drastic measures need to be taken to save the
I tend to lean more towards the death penalty because it seems like the just thing to do. I know we all make mistakes but it 's crazy to me to let someone live who has killed an innocent person, and most people can 't just kill a person because they wanted to, I feel like you have to be pretty crazy to do such a thing. At the same time though as people we are not perfect and we make mistakes, we have sent hundreds of people to death row and they were not guilty. That shows we are not perfect, but to me if I know the person is guilty and there is no doubt about it
Criminals that have been convicted of murder, rape, child abuse, and other violent crimes due deserve some punishment. They get thrown in jail where they suffer boredom and other minor difficulties, but typically they do not suffer the way they made their victims suffer. Non-violent offenders, crimes like auto-theft or burglary, should not suffer beatings and other harmful things that other inmates might force upon them. They broke the law without hurting people physically, so they should have to suffer through assault in prison. No, inmates should not be harmed physically, emotionally, or physically, but it will happen in prison and when it happens it should be the violent contenders that are